US POLITICS: Congratulation to USA for their upcoming health

clarence monster

it will be interesting to see if he echoes the sentiments of that huffpo article re her abilities wrt persuasion

some careerist hack like kagan

easy bro, it's not like she started a tumblr about hipsters or something

she's pro-choice, phew! she's probably gay and sure showed those mean army recruiters that one time!

― sveltko (k3vin k.), Sunday, May 9, 2010 11:39 PM (1 minute ago) Bookmark

let's not scoff at this

dogg the point is any fucking obama pick is going to be pro-choice and pro-gay, bfd

yo could u link that huffpo article you're referring to?

new thread imo btw

that obama is really picking kagan over wood because he just wants extra executive power is a pretty retarded suggestion - we have a far right-wing supreme court either way.

i would start the thread but the pressure of coming up with a good title is too much for me

anyway, this is the huffpo column about kagan -- it's not gonna do anything to pacify people already against her nomination, but it does make some interesting points, both about the court as a whole and about kagan

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lawrence-lessig/a-case-for-kagan_b_551511.html

funny cuz this far-right court you're talking about has ruled 5-4 (stevens in the majority) a few times against executive powers in the past few years

xp

that you can honestly believe that obama would make a decision like this as some furtive executive power grab is just so lol

but I guess you believe that he's an evil dude and that's how evil dudes operate I guess

yeah it's not like he reconsidered his stance on FISA or the FOIA act or anything, he's a solid guy without any of the usual trappings of power - his immunity to its allure is kind of singular n'est-pas

yeah dogg i read that article a while ago, it basically doesn't say anything other than "trust me, i know her and she's gonna be great". the whole thing about her being able to sway conservatives based on the fact that she hired some white dudes at harvard is some wishful thinking BS imho - it's actually the opposite of what we want, which is someone who can make conservatives see it our way, rather than meeting them halfway, which is the best we can say about hiring a bunch of conservatives. what is the point of forging consensus with conervatives if the consensus isn't on our side?

so you want compromises where the other side suddenly agrees with you 100%

alright i bit the bullet US POLITICS: underrated supreme court decisions that i have read

what is the point of forging consensus with conservatives

well I mean I think the point of forging consensus w/conservatives is that one actually agrees with them generally about most stuff, if we're being honest

i mean that entire artice iirc goes on about how awesome kagan is without describing a single view she holds, other than that she's a "progressive". alright, if you say so, lawrence lessig.

xp no you retard, i don't want compromises at all. i want someone who has a record as being on the right side, and persuading conservatives to agree with her view of the case, rather than meeting them halfway - something wood has a record of doing, and kagan we're just praying for

and yeah i realize nine times outta ten wood and thomas may have the same view on a case - it's the close ones we're worried about

we can lock this now