Obama Nominates Lesbian Elena Kagan to Supreme Court

[Bloodshot Scott]

Maybe you should have thought those thoughts BEFORE starting this thread :2 cents:

Just enlightening you brilliant minds here on FO on what's floatin' around out there in cyberspace. :thumbsup:

 

[meesterperfect]

well the woman has no voting record, its hard to judge her.
never a judge, never a senator,ect.
truth is we don't need any extreme leftys or rightys on the sc, especially lefties, always changing things, fuckin things up worse,,,,,,, but if obama picked her i think its safe to assume she's a lefty, just how left i don't know.
any evidence?

 

[Bloodshot Scott]

well the woman has no voting record, its hard to judge her.
never a judge, never a senator,ect.
truth is we don't need any extreme leftys or rightys on the sc, especially lefties, always changing things, fuckin things up worse,,,,,,, but if obama picked her i think its safe to assume she's a lefty, just how left i don't know.
any evidence?

She's a rug muncher, what more evidence do you need? (jk, jk)

 

[meesterperfect]

oh man, well thats surely an indication.

 

[pitmaster]

Wrong C4TB.

I know people think you can wrangle the words on this...

BUT the reality is there are only anti-abortionists and pro-choicers.

People who don't think abortions shouldn't take place in any event are "anti" it, right? They are indifferent at best over all life excepting the "unborn".

In order to be "pro abortion" a person would have to favor abortion in any case over birth. No reasonable person believes those who believe it's a choice for the person carrying the pregnancy actually favor abortions over births.

The most important value on the subject for them is the right to choose one way or the other...ergo they ARE "pro choice".

Now if you have evidence this woman steers pregnant women to abortion irrespective of circumstance then produce it. That would make her 'pro abortion'.:2 cents:

I am actually Pro Abortion, I favor abortion over birth in most cases. I believe there should be mandatory requirements in order to have children

1.Both parents must be Married for at least 3 years before having a child

2.Both parents must be of a certain standard of intelligence and education level

3.The parents must show proof of finacial responsibility and must provide a certain standard of living for the child, a fund must be set up at the childs birth and a certain amount of money must be paid into it anually until the child is 18

This would cut down on the scum breeding like flies. I see everyday the trashiest people having children. The scum is far outbreeding the intelligent people and this is going to be a huge disaster. Slaves breed slaves.

 

[Hot Mega]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/05/07/elena-kagans-goldman-sach_n_568350.html




Anything else?

Uh, yeah....read your own link the next time....

"This advisory group was comprised of leaders from various sectors including academia, the media, business, and other industry," said spokeswoman Tracy Schmaler. "They met once a year for a daylong conference organized around public policy matters. The group was not involved in making any investment decisions for the company."

It's not like she was running Haliburton or something and they ended up committing what amounts to larceny after she "awarded" no bid contracts to support a war she effected.:o

 

[meesterperfect]

I am actually Pro Abortion, I favor abortion over birth in most cases. I believe there should be mandatory requirements in order to have children

1.Both parents must be Married for at least 3 years before having a child

2.Both parents must be of a certain standard of intelligence and education level

3.The parents must show proof of finacial responsibility and must provide a certain standard of living for the child, a fund must be set up at the childs birth and a certain amount of money must be paid into it anually until the child is 18

This would cut down on the scum breeding like flies. I see everyday the trashiest people having children. The scum is far outbreeding the intelligent people and this is going to be a huge disaster. Slaves breed slaves.

or simply just stop supporting people for life for having kids they can't afford.
stop the money, and they'lll stop having a kid every year or so.

i am convinced that this is the root cause of many many problems in the country today.

off topic though.

 

[pete rose]

I'm in full support of the Voluntary Human Extinction Movement.
http://www.vhemt.org/

 

[Hot Mega]

I am actually Pro Abortion, I favor abortion over birth in most cases. I believe there should be mandatory requirements in order to have children

1.Both parents must be Married for at least 3 years before having a child

2.Both parents must be of a certain standard of intelligence and education level

3.The parents must show proof of finacial responsibility and must provide a certain standard of living for the child, a fund must be set up at the childs birth and a certain amount of money must be paid into it anually until the child is 18

This would cut down on the scum breeding like flies. I see everyday the trashiest people having children. The scum is far outbreeding the intelligent people and this is going to be a huge disaster. Slaves breed slaves.

or simply just stop supporting people for life for having kids they can't afford.
stop the money, and they'lll stop having a kid every year or so.

i am convinced that this is the root cause of many many problems in the country today.

off topic though.

Neither of your ideas together are well thought out IMO.

Having a child in most cases is at least an 18 year endeavor. MANY things change (especially financially) in peoples lives over the course of 18 years.

I suspect there is a very small percentage...of people who are incentively motivated to collect public benefits by having a child or 2.

This is likely a case where the hyperbole doesn't match the facts. That doesn't mean there aren't those having irresponsible sex, producing a pregnancy and the resulting child eventually getting public services. I just doubt the calculus they are using when they are fucking amounts to them planning for a pay day as opposed to simply treating pregnancy as a crap shoot.

 

[gotham123]

good that's another thing we have in common, i like chicks too :thefinger
every political figure should be gay :love-smi:

 

[meesterperfect]

i disagree mega, There is a very large percentage of citizens of the usa living off the fat of the land, for free, using children as livestock.
And that percentage is always increasing.
Its more than you think.
And more often than not those kids grow up and do the same thing.

In my lifetime I watched NJ turn into a welfare state, I assume it wasn't the only one.

 

[Gordar]

Neither of your ideas together are well thought out IMO.

Having a child in most cases is at least an 18 year endeavor. MANY things change (especially financially) in peoples lives over the course of 18 years.

I suspect there is a very small percentage...of people who are incentively motivated to collect public benefits by having a child or 2.

This is likely a case where the hyperbole doesn't match the facts. That doesn't mean there aren't those having irresponsible sex, producing a pregnancy and the resulting child eventually getting public services. I just doubt the calculus they are using when they are fucking amounts to them planning for a pay day as opposed to simply treating pregnancy as a crap shoot.

i disagree mega, There is a very large percentage of citizens of the usa living off the fat of the land, for free, using children as livestock.
And that percentage is always increasing.
Its more than you think.
And more often than not those kids grow up and do the same thing.

In my lifetime I watched NJ turn into a welfare state, I assume it wasn't the only one.

Birth to age 5

Housing $28,831
Food $11,882
Transportation $10,477
Clothing $4,311
Health $5,040
Care/school $10,246
Miscellaneous $8,961
Total $79,748


Ages 5 to 10

Housing $26,787 (-8%)
Food $13,244 (+11%)
Transportation $11,008 (+5%)
Clothing $4,515 (+5%)
Health $5,386 (+7%)
Care/school $8,754 (-15%)
Miscellaneous $9,277 (+4%)
Total $78,971


Ages 10 to 15

Housing $26,671 (-1/2%)
Food $14,371 (+9%)
Transportation $11,314 (+3%)
Clothing $5,571 (+23%)
Health $5,477 (+2%)
School $6,820 (-22%)
Miscellaneous $9,589 (+3%)
Total $79,813


Ages 15 to 18

Housing $22,757 (-15%)
Food $12,130 (-12%)
Transportation $10,297 (-10%)
Clothing $4,418 (-24%)
Health $4,576 (-19%)
School $6,632 (-3%)
Miscellaneous $7,582 (-20%)
Total $68,392

http://www.askmen.com/money/investing_150/179_investing.html

I don't know how much benefits US states give to people with kids, but I doubt it's more than the costs, so getting kids just for the benefits would be financial suicide.

 

[Trident1]

If Kagan was a Conservative there'd be nonstop criticism from the lefties.

 

[pete rose]

Everything is balanced.

 

[Facetious]

Re: Obama Nominates Lesbian Elena Kagan to Supreme Court

Brilliant strategy! appoint unqualified members of a protected class into key government positions of power and they can do just about anything they damn well please!
Don't you DARE REBUT Mizz Kagen you bigoted right winged homophobic teabaggin anti government alarmist. . . ! :flame:


The democrats have become such proficient cheap artists along the way as they transition our government into a model not much different than that of Caracas Venezuela.

 

[Hot Mega]

i disagree mega, There is a very large percentage of citizens of the usa living off the fat of the land, for free, using children as livestock.
And that percentage is always increasing.
Its more than you think.
And more often than not those kids grow up and do the same thing.

In my lifetime I watched NJ turn into a welfare state, I assume it wasn't the only one.

Less than 2 pct of New Jersey's people receive welfare. That means more than 98 pct do not. How is that a "welfare state"??

Hint: Go by the facts instead of what you think you see from you limited, possibly flawed point of view.

Re: Obama Nominates Lesbian Elena Kagan to Supreme Court

Brilliant strategy! appoint unqualified members of a protected class into key government positions of power and they can do just about anything they damn well please!
Don't you DARE REBUT Mizz Kagen you bigoted right winged homophobic teabaggin anti government alarmist. . . !

The democrats have become such proficient cheap artists along the way as they transition our government into a model not much different than that of Caracas Venezuela.

If confirmed, she will be one of nine people who decide on a small, (albeit important) select, few percentages of cases. How is that a job which gives her the power to do what she wants to do?

 

[Facetious]

Everything about this person ''kagen'' spells trouble. /\:1orglaugh/\
Let's start with her family life

Kagan was born in New York City, the middle of three children of Gloria Gittelman Kagan, an elementary school teacher, and Robert Kagan, an attorney. Kagan's two brothers are public school teachers, as their mother had been before them.

School teachers & an attorney, is it any surprise?

Kagan joined the faculty of the University of Chicago Law School as an assistant professor in 1991 and became a tenured professor of law in 1995.[11]

University of Chicago ? doesn't somebody else have a connection with this centre of academia ? Oh yeah, Kagan's appointee in fact! Cronies! :1orglaugh

While at Chicago, she published "Regulation of Hate Speech and Pornography

Oh, really ? Well we already know how proficient the party of jackass is at spinning twisting and tweaking the language in order to suit their particular agenda, therefore, any speech that goes against the grain of the fresh prince of bill ayres can be considered as hate speech, I got it

. . and what's this regulating :uhem: ''pronography'' ?
Are you sure that we're talking about a liberal here?

After R.A.V.," a law review article on the regulation of First Amendment hate speech; "Private Speech, Public Purpose: The Role of Governmental Motive in First Amendment Doctrine," an article discussing the significance of governmental motive in regulating speech;

She wants to adjust our First Amendment rights to her liking

and, "Confirmation Messes, Old and New," a review of a book by Stephen L. Carter discussing the judicial confirmation process.

she thinks that our judicial confirmation process is too rigorous, at least for democratic appointments. Hey, if you can't take the heat, bitch, get a lower profile job !

According to her colleagues, Kagan's students raved about and admired Kagan from the beginning, but she was granted tenure "despite the reservations of some colleagues who thought she had not published enough."[12]

Me gay female. Me get special privilege or else me throw a tantrum fit !!!!!!


A few other items of noteworthiness -

• Kagan's senior thesis at Princeton apparently discussed the virtues of Socialism in New York.

• This appointment is an ivy leaguer through and through:
Harvard, Oxford and Princeton, OK,
The ivy leaguers are notorious for being the absolute worst representatives, do your own research if you have to, thery're just plain awful!

• Still, no judicial experience for mizz kagan . . . it's funny to hear obama try to suggest that his appointments lack of judicial experience is actually to her credit .
and this is your middle of the party democrat they say
Sickos, these goons in government today . . :shakes head in disgust:

*All material above sourced for wiki "Kagan"

 

[Member2019]

Me gay female. Me get special privilege or else me throw a tantrum fit !!!!!!

Actually, I've never seen that.

The worst I've ever seen from anyone, and never any worse ...

"Me gay female.
Me get discriminated against.
Me now want preference to balance that out."

The concept of "fair" is an argument everyone makes. The problem is that "fair" is never objective, always subjective.

The key is reaching someone who had no spoon growing up, and the minority/female reality atop of that. Now those people are like ...

"Me gay female.
Me get discriminated against.
Me never needed help, so don't patronize me with some now."

I do have to say that many of her stances are disturbing. Like many alleged civil rights leaders, they cross a point where they take the abuse from some and apply it back on everyone in a reverse stereotype.

 

[saschaxx]

She´s nominated to make an excellent JOB !
She´s NOT nominated cause of her sexuality.

Means to me : If her job is done well, she may be shemale or lezzie or bisexual or non-sexual, her problem as far as her job is done well.

 

[BioDefenseGrad]

"She" is PAT!:rofl:

Jon Lovitz