Do we want a Socialist on our Supreme Court?

EagleEye 2010/05/13 17:26:47
As if there were not already ample evidence to deny Elena Kagan a seat on the U.S. Supreme Court, the controversy surrounding the nominee continues to swirl. The controversy casts many doubts on her fitness for the Court.

First, a recap of what we know so far is in order. Ever since her youth she has sought out and surrounded herself with Leftwing extremists in politics. She cried and got drunk when Ronald Reagan was elected President in 1980. During her senior year of college she wrote a thesis in which she aligned herself with the Socialist movement and declared that the Left must unite to oppose 'the common, entrenched enemy.'

She became a faculty member of the University of Chicago School of Law where she met Barack Obama, who at the time was a part-time instructor. They formed an immediate bond and friendship based upon their shared Leftwing political ideology.

During her years at Chicago she published an article in the Chicago Law Review that advocated for government restriction of free speech--a clear violation of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

(AP Photo/Hunter College High School). Kagan as a militant Leftwing extremist during college.

As Dean of the Harvard School of Law she banned the ROTC from the campus--also in violation of federal law--due to military's policy of 'don't ask don't tell' concerning gays, which, by the way, was implemented by her own former boss, President Bill Clinton. She also argued that universities that allowed military recruiters should be barred from receiving federal funds. For that she received a rare unanimous smack-down from the Supreme Court, which ruled 8-0 against her.

But perhaps the biggest bombshell of all is that Chief Justice Roberts of the U.S. Supreme Court stated that Kagan attempted to get the Court to embrace a strange new philosophy on the First Amendment that would allow the government to censor TV and radio, the Internet, and posters and pamphlets.

Anyone with a knowledge of history knows that this is eerily reminiscent of the very same censorship measures undertaken by the German Nazis and the Soviet Communists during the 20th century.

Can book burning be far behind?

At issue today, however, is the new controversy surrounding Kagan. 2 developing stories concerning her written records, which the White House so far refuses to release, and her violation of federal law, are coming to the forefront of the attention of government watchdogs.

Regarding her written records,

Senate Democrats so far are dodging questions on whether the Obama administration should release records of Supreme Court Nominee Elena Kagan dating back to her days in the Clinton White House.

Kagan served on the White House Domestic Policy Council and then as Associate White House Counsel from 1995 to 1999.

Previously, the White House said it would wait for the Senate Judiciary Committee to makes its request before releasing any memos, which are currently held in the Clinton Presidential Library in Arkansas.
Further, the JAG prosecutor who handled the government's case against Gitmo terrorists, former Army Judge Advocate General Kyndra Rotunda, stated that Kagan's decision as the Dean of the Harvard Law School to ban the ROTC went far beyond a mere disagreement with army policy:

Rotunda, who is now a law professor at Chapman University Law School in Southern California, said Kagan did something more than simply disagree with the military over its policy regarding homosexuals -- she refused to follow the law, which required her to make room for the military recruiters.

“(I)t wasn’t just a policy – it was a federal law,” Rotunda said. “And when she disagreed with federal law, she just simply decided not to follow it. And the Supreme Court unanimously found that the law was constitutional, and there was no reason to keep recruiters off of law school grounds."
Thus, yet another in a long string of serious questions concerning Kagan's fitness for the Court comes to light--do we need a Supreme Court Justice who deliberately broke federal law?
Add Photos & Videos

Top Opinion

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest

  • Not My Real Name 2012/12/07 15:37:10
    Not My Real Name

    To answer the question at the top, yes.
  • badmoon 2012/05/08 17:52:37
    It is this kind of nonsense that makes we really wonder if Obama has lost his mind. This is how he wants to start his campaign? Look at the questions and fingers he is going to get over this one. I don't mind because it make him look like a manipulating moron. The only reason anyone would ever consider this crazy bitch for a seat would be for stacking the deck. This woman is not going to care about the country, our laws or our constitution, she is nothing more than a mouth for the Obama administration. Kind of like Monica was for Clinton. The reality is most of the time she would be the coo coo vote. One that is always predictable and on the far far left all the way to China left. She at best is a loose cannon that will never be left alone and her choices will always be suspect. She has proven she will only follow the law if she chooses to do so and has no compunction in making up new laws all by her self to fit her agenda. Why on earth is she even a consideration? Why don't we put one of the new black panthers on a seat along with Goofy and Donald Duck? Unbelievable!
  • enlightened one 2010/05/15 21:13:15
    enlightened one
    Obama just can't stand not slapping Americans in the face. How can Kagan function as a Supreme Court Judge when she does not support and uphold the U.S. Constitution?
  • Taryn Nicole 2010/05/15 13:57:43
    Taryn Nicole
    no, socialism is against our country's TRUE political party which was democracy or capitalism or which ever it was and why would it matter anyway? we already have one as our president.
  • Critter 2010/05/14 19:20:07
    NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! and NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  • average Joe blow 2010/05/13 23:42:30
    average Joe blow
    Sounds as if Obama picked her a long time ago, Just like the rest.
    anyone see a pattern here?.
  • EagleEye average... 2010/05/13 23:57:55
    .......good observation.......he put her in the perfect spot!
  • BronxBob 2010/05/13 19:33:47
    Elena Kagan is no socialist; previous Supreme Court justices have been more aligned with socialist thinking than she is. So it's no big deal. The U.S. swings right & left. American history might give you some perspective. I'm okay. You're okay. She's okay.
  • EagleEye BronxBob 2010/05/13 19:57:52
    .....Elena kagen is a Socialist! All of her writings and agruments prove it! Plus she was nominated by a Socialist!
  • Pete 2010/05/13 18:58:34 (edited)
    Supreme Court Nominee Elena Kagan will be nominated. Why I feel she will?
    Socialist is running our Capital, and Obama's plans are to turn our country into a socialist country.

    I hate the thought, but all the bills Obama passed, leads us to that horrible fact.
  • Gun665 2010/05/13 18:40:12
  • itoldyouso 2010/05/13 18:37:15
    Nope. Nadda. Absolutely no. As far as I'm concerned the constitution should be changed and they should be elected officials by the people. Not by dimwits like your president.
  • imtoast 2010/05/13 18:25:27
    My personal opinion is I don't want anyone Obummer picks put on the Supreme Court. He is a commie, anyone he puts forward will have his same values. No thank you.
  • EagleEye imtoast 2010/05/13 18:33:38
    ........imtoast..afraid we're toast!
  • imtoast EagleEye 2010/05/14 16:31:39
    I know....don't stop trying to stop them though!
  • chaoskitty123 2010/05/13 18:10:12
    What happened to a few weeks ago when this idiot caused the political left to lose their minds when he chose Moderate selections? Moderates are the only ones we should have on the Supreme Court to be honest since they work across party lines and won't play favorites as often as Conservatives and Liberals do.

    Guess the Prez can't handle the political extreme left being against him and caved in to the pressure. Far as I'm concerned, this choice is about as extreme left as you can get and even most Lib's will regret this choice if she somehow makes it through.

    While she has every right to be a Justice like anyone else, I find it disturbing that Obama could move from the middle to the extreme left when he had these other choices every bit as good who would have probably been accepted without a fight. I have a feeling he chose Kagen because he knows there's no way the Republicans will let her through without a fight and that's exactly what he wants to win votes for Democrats in November. However, a growing number of Liberals are turning on Socialists and we might just see this decision backfire pushing more Lib's to their own political right since Moderate and Conservative Democrats are merged in the same groups like the Blue Dogs.

    So if he wants to push Kagen... push back with support for Blue Dogs and see how many Liberals decide it's time to move in a new direction.
  • EagleEye chaoski... 2010/05/13 18:32:29
    .....I completly agree!
  • B.S. Detector 2010/05/13 18:07:24
  • bls 2010/05/13 18:01:53
    No, we don't want a socialist on the Supreme Court, in the White House or in any single elected office in this country, including the Dog Catcher. This Proressive Agenda must be defeated, at any any all costs
  • sweetguy45 2010/05/13 17:39:06
    Since most (if not all) of the decisions that the Supreme Court makes effects every American at one time or another, I believe nominees for that position should be voted on by the citizens of this nation and not just the Judicial Committee of our Senate. Actually since every law that Congress in general passes effects every American in one way or another, all laws that are passed by Congress should be voted on by the people before the President signs it. We The People should have a say in the laws that effect us. That is truly the American way.
  • bls sweetguy45 2010/05/13 18:02:45
  • Heptarch 2010/05/13 17:31:03
    Even if all of that is true, this is America. A Socialist can be on the SCOTUS just as any other American can.
  • EagleEye Heptarch 2010/05/13 17:50:05
    .....unfortunately, I must agree with you! But we shouldn't simply accept her nomination as a given!
  • Heptarch EagleEye 2010/05/13 17:55:00 (edited)
    Agreed. No nomination should be accepted as a given. Due diligence is necessary. I simply disagree that being a Socialist should disqualify her, if she is one.
  • EagleEye Heptarch 2010/05/13 18:08:58
    Kagan argued that restricting free speech is a legitimate role of government, provided government...
  • Heptarch EagleEye 2010/05/13 18:54:20
    Reference, please? I'd love to look at the context of that statement.
  • EagleEye Heptarch 2010/05/13 22:34:33
    In an article Kagan published in the University of Chicago Law Review in 1996, entitled, 'Private Speech, Public Purpose: the Role of Government Motive in First Amendment Doctrine.' she contends that the negative impact of a law restricting freedom of speech is subservient to the government's motive for enacting such restrictions.

    As long as the government can show 'proper intent' in such restrictions on free speech, then the restrictions stand.
  • Heptarch EagleEye 2010/05/14 00:25:52
    Are we talking her being against the proverbial shouting of "FIRE!" in a crowded theater here?
  • EagleEye 2010/05/13 17:27:36
    .....Very smart lady....to bad she's a Socialist, like our President!

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

News & Politics

2016/02/11 10:47:11

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals