Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

Is this a centrist who should sit on the Supreme Court Bench?

Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan compared terrorism proposal to ‘dictatorships’

Read more:

Answer Question

Asked by Anonymous at 6:49 AM on May. 12, 2010 in Politics & Current Events

Answers (9)
  • Does anyone think she is too extreme or do you think she is reasonable and capable of following the facts of the case.


    Answer by Anonymous at 6:49 AM on May. 12, 2010

  • Dare I say, this administration values lack of experience more than any other I have ever seen within my lifetime? Nearly every decision they make is just as ridiculous. Amazing, really.


    Answer by Anonymous at 8:05 AM on May. 12, 2010

  • op, get with the program 40 percent of the men and women who have served as Supreme Court justices have had no judicial experience, this one is quite qualified otherwise and is endorsed by many.

    Answer by older at 8:14 AM on May. 12, 2010

  • I already KNOW why you would endorse her.

    Answer by Anonymous at 8:18 AM on May. 12, 2010

  • anon, you know jack sh...... the woman has not come out as gay and being gay would not in any way deter her from doing her job well done. One things has nothing to do with the other.

    Answer by older at 8:20 AM on May. 12, 2010

  • It is true that so many on the past have not had any judicial experience. But because a Republican such as Nixon appointed two who had no experience, that is just fine with these right wingers. Gawwwwd. As soon as I read about the nominee, I just KNEW the Repubs here would start bashing her. Sure enough,I signed on and started reading and saw the first bashing post. Its the kind of narrow-minded, arrogant,judgemental crap that shows up here all the time. I am never surprised. So predictable. The only thing that matters is qualifications,people. The others without experience had qualifications that suited them and they were appointed.
    Give it a rest Repubs.

    Answer by Anonymous at 9:31 AM on May. 12, 2010

  • anon 9:31, I totally agree.

    Answer by older at 9:33 AM on May. 12, 2010

  • Maybe there are some of us today who were children when Nixon appointed those 2 unqualified, inexperienced ones that he did. Maybe some have realized that appointing someone who is inexperienced is NOT the best way to go. Talk about ancient history, bringing up NIXON!!! Shoot, Kagan herself would have been a child when Nixon was POTUS. But, sure, just because it has been done before, by other presidents, that is a good enough reason for ME to support someone who I feel is unqualified and inexperienced.

    (there are also a lot of moms on here who were not even born when Nixon was pres, and who don't even know who he was...)

    Answer by Anonymous at 10:55 AM on May. 12, 2010

  • First of all your link doesn't even have the entire context of the letter available. It takes one blurb and draws a drastic conclusion from it. The quote is:

    “when dictatorships have passed laws stripping their courts of power to review executive detention or punishment of prisoners,”

    I believe she is referring to the checks and balances in The Constitution and limits on Executive Power. It is not a far stretch to liken attempts to increase Executive Power and decrease the powers of the other two branches to that of a dictatorship. It is a slippery slope argument. You are making it sound like she is calling the Bush Administration a dictatorship, and she is not. She is arguing the legality of it.

    Answer by beckcorc at 11:24 AM on May. 12, 2010

Join CafeMom now to contribute your answer and become part of our community. It's free and takes just a minute.