Justice Elena Kagan
8/8/10 17:45![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
telemann.livejournal.com posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
talkpolitics
Reason no x² why I'm glad Senator Obama won the 2008 election:
Just this week: Elena Kagan was sworn as the newest justice on the Supreme Court. Can you imagine the Roberts court had President McCain had the opportunity to nominate two justices? It would be even further to the right than it currently is (the Roberts court is the most conservative since the 1930s). For the first time three female judges are on the Supreme Court at the same time, and all of them were nominated by Democratic presidents. For the record, President Obama has appointed 40 federal judges with nearly another fifty nominated and awaiting Senate confirmation (which will be sped up with the revision of the Senate rules when the new Congress is seated in January).
(no subject)
Date: 8/8/10 22:26 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 8/8/10 23:07 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 8/8/10 23:40 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 9/8/10 00:21 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 9/8/10 02:10 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 9/8/10 02:35 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 9/8/10 02:58 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 8/8/10 22:31 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 8/8/10 22:35 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 8/8/10 23:40 (UTC)You know, the alternative being worse DOES MATTER.
(no subject)
Date: 8/8/10 23:44 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 8/8/10 23:48 (UTC)That's quite some logic.
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 9/8/10 01:43 (UTC)If that's the point, it's completely inane.
"Who cares if Obama is being a douche and who cares if his appointee raises concerns -- you know what, turn that frown into a smile because under the Republicans it'd be even worse." Let's set aside the pointless counterfactual speculation and worry about what's actually going on. Surely we can set the bar higher than "hey, not as bad as a Republican douchebag."
(no subject)
Date: 9/8/10 01:53 (UTC)lol...If you say so.
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 9/8/10 01:13 (UTC)I don't know why you call it "identity politics" I call it "not having blinders on" --
Though, to be fair, conservatives have been getting a little better about considering ALL of the apples.
This diversity stuff, this ::~Affirmative Action~:: stuff means you get better people when you do it right.
If Obama was like "OK one woman is enough! Can't get too crazy here!" we'd have some guy in place of Kagan who would not be quite as good as she is since she seems to be the best one for the job at the moment. And she's a woman. And Obama didn't let the fact that she's a woman stop him from picking her. In fact, his short list was filled with women, there have been four woman in the history of the SCOTUS and two were put there by Obama. When you have that few women who have been on the court there are prefect female candidates all over the place since not enough people have been brave enough to give them a chance.
Bush SCOTUS LONG Short List:
WOMEN (18)
Sonia Sotomayor* (how much do you want to bet she was just on Bush's list for diversity and never a serious pick?)
Karen J. Williams
Edith Brown Clement
Edith H. Jones
Priscilla R. Owen
Alice M. Batchelder
Deborah L. Cook
Ann Claire Williams
Consuelo María Callahan
Deanell Reece Tacha
Janice Rogers Brown
Cecilia M. Altonaga
Loretta A. Preska
Maura D. Corrigan
Rebecca Love Kourlis
Maureen E. Mahoney
Mary Ann Glendon
Harriet Miers ALMOST
MEN (29)
Samuel A. Alito, Jr. CONFIRMED
J. Harvie Wilkinson III
Emilio M. Garza
Edward C. Prado
Danny J. Boggs
Frank H. Easterbrook
Richard Posner
Alex Kozinski
Michael W. McConnell
William H. Pryor, Jr
Brett M. Kavanaugh
John G. Roberts, Jr. CONFIRMED
Ricardo H. Hinojosa
Raoul G. Cantero, III
John Cornyn
Mike Crapo
Mike DeWine
Orrin Hatch
Jon Kyl
Mel Martinez
Christopher Cox
Paul Clement
Miguel A. Estrada
Peter D. Keisler
Theodore Olson
Viet Dinh
Alberto R. Gonzales
J. Michael Luttig
Larry D. Thompson
Obama SCOTUS LONG Short List:
WOMEN (18)
Sonia Sotomayor CONFIRMED
Ann Claire Williams
Diane Pamela Wood
M. Margaret McKeown
Kim McLane Wardlaw
Christine Arguello
Leah Ward Sears
Beth Brinkmann
Hillary Clinton
Elena Kagan CONFIRMED
Janet Napolitano
Amy Klobuchar
Claire McCaskill
Jennifer Granholm
Pamela S. Karlan
Martha Minow
Kathleen Sullivan
Elizabeth Warren
MEN (14)
Johnnie B. Rawlinson
Sidney Runyan Thomas
Merrick Garland
Ruben Castillo
Carlos R. Moreno
Larry EchoHawk
Eric Holder
Harold Hongju Koh
Ken Salazar
Cass Sunstein
Sheldon Whitehouse
Deval Patrick
Seth P. Waxman
Goodwin Liu
(no subject)
Date: 9/8/10 01:53 (UTC)You're kidding, I hope, right? http://www.thenewamerican.com/index.php/opinion/959-jack-kenny/3286-elena-kagan-the-worldwide-qbattlefieldq
(no subject)
Date: 9/8/10 04:01 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 9/8/10 02:16 (UTC)'Though, to be fair, conservatives have been getting a little better about considering ALL of the apples. '
They always have. I've never heard anyone say the USSC has too many women. But it seems all the lefties want to look only at women candidates because there's just too many men on there.
It's doubly amusing that you argued that Obama is better because he'll look at more qualified candidates and no try and exclude women while the list you posted showed he looked at as many women as Bush did and far fewer men (because there aren't enough qualified men to be on the court?).
(no subject)
Date: 9/8/10 03:54 (UTC)You're assuming that somehow Obama is really looking for the "best candidate" and giving a fair consideration to every potential candidate and that he doesn't have ulterior political motives for everything he does.
I mean, do you think the republicans picked Sarah Palin because they just opened up their hearts to women and she was the best candidate? .... No. It isn't really different for the democrats just because you wish it was.
I assume using the phrase "identity politics" was a comment on the "oh wow! A woman! How wonderful!" attitude of the OP and not a comment on the fact that Kegan is a woman.
(no subject)
Date: 8/8/10 23:33 (UTC)Couldn't resist
Date: 8/8/10 23:43 (UTC)Re: Couldn't resist
Date: 8/8/10 23:45 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 8/8/10 23:56 (UTC)Re: Couldn't resist
Date: 9/8/10 02:17 (UTC)Re: Couldn't resist
Date: 9/8/10 02:56 (UTC)Re: Couldn't resist
Date: 9/8/10 03:56 (UTC)Re: Couldn't resist
Date: 9/8/10 04:42 (UTC)Re: Couldn't resist
Date: 9/8/10 21:22 (UTC)Re: Couldn't resist
Date: 9/8/10 14:45 (UTC)I only wish bushorchimp.com were still around. That was some good stuff.
Re: Couldn't resist
Date: 9/8/10 15:30 (UTC)Re: Couldn't resist
Date: 9/8/10 16:06 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 9/8/10 00:18 (UTC)Use your IMAGINATION!
Date: 9/8/10 01:08 (UTC)Not much difference at all.
You do remember that McCain is the "McCain" from "McCain-Feingold", right?
Re: Use your IMAGINATION!
Date: 9/8/10 05:25 (UTC)If only he could remember that.
Re: Use your IMAGINATION!
Date: 10/8/10 03:51 (UTC)Re: Use your IMAGINATION!
Date: 9/8/10 10:46 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 9/8/10 01:51 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 9/8/10 03:25 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 9/8/10 05:25 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 9/8/10 02:07 (UTC)You say that like it's a bad thing :P
(no subject)
Date: 9/8/10 05:27 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 9/8/10 06:19 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 9/8/10 11:38 (UTC)This is way over optimistic.
(no subject)
Date: 10/8/10 09:08 (UTC)