Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The question everyone's whispering about Kagan
WND ^ | May 10, 2010 | Art Moore

Posted on 05/11/2010 6:38:50 AM PDT by yoe

"Liberal cowardice" and "conservative discomfort" are burying the question many privately are posing about Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan, asserts noted political commentator and blogger Andrew Sullivan, who identifies himself as a gay Catholic.

(So is she gay?)

"If she were to hide her Jewishness, it would seem rightly odd, bizarre, anachronistic, even arguably self-critical or self-loathing,"Sullivan reasoned. "And yet we have been told by many that she is gay ... and no one will ask directly if this is true and no one in the administration will tell us definitively."

[snip] The White House tried to quash the issue last month when it criticized CBS News for running on its website a piece by blogger Ben Domenech that said Kagan is an open lesbian.

[snip]

Domenech wrote that Obama "would please much of his base" by nominating Kagan, because she would be the "first openly gay justice."

[snip] But an unnamed Obama administration official told the Washington Post the contention was "inaccurate," and former White House Communications Director Anita Dunn accused CBS News of "posting lies."

(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...


TOPICS: Extended News; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: cryptolesbo; deisel
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-63 next last
Kagan like Napolitano and Reno before them are well known for a female ruthlessness that is truly abhorrent to 'normal' values. Kegan should not be put in a position to continue her march and agenda....the Supreme Court is not suitable to her or anyone who has never been a judge or in a position to remain judicially impartial.....

She has NEVER ruled on anything so how can she answer any questions put to her by those questioning her....this is business as usual by Obama-who-hates-freedom, liberty, and the United States of America for which she stands..........he, Obama continues to cheapen and dismantle a once Great Nation.

1 posted on 05/11/2010 6:38:50 AM PDT by yoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: yoe

“continues to cheapen and dismantle a once Great Nation”...........not for long. After November, he will have to just sit in his office and wonder where it all went.


2 posted on 05/11/2010 6:43:30 AM PDT by RC2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yoe
It's bound to come out sooner or later.

3 posted on 05/11/2010 6:43:44 AM PDT by Genoa (Luke 12:2)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yoe

This is the biggest smoke screen promulgated by the LEFT.

Her writings are purely anti-American. She’s as far left as one can get.

I am sure NYers of a certain age well remember Ted Weiss. She worked for him. She also worked for LIz Holtzman....see all about her activities on the Nixon impeachment panel.


4 posted on 05/11/2010 6:43:56 AM PDT by Carley (WE CAN SEE NOVEMBER FROM OUR HOUSE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yoe
I could care less if she's gay, bi, a transvestite or cross-dresser.

However, what I find amusing is that while we have all been indoctrinated to be more "tolerant" (and as Dear Leader and most Demo-Rats and all libs are for allowing gays in the military, gay marriage, etc.) WHY is the fact that she might be, all of a sudden appear to be something no one wants to acknowledge much less, even discussed?

If liberals were not hypocrites, they would be nothing!!!

5 posted on 05/11/2010 6:45:05 AM PDT by Conservative Vermont Vet ((One of ONLY 37 Conservatives in the People's Republic of Vermont. Socialists and Progressives All))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yoe
I don't care what she does in her private life. Seriously.

However, she's no Friend of the Constitution and as such has no place in our Government much less sitting on the Supreme Court.

6 posted on 05/11/2010 6:45:10 AM PDT by Dead Corpse (III, Alarm and Muster)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dead Corpse; yoe
Call me sentimental, but I look at morality when assessing the fitness of anyone for a position of leadership. I'm just funny that way.

7 posted on 05/11/2010 6:48:33 AM PDT by Genoa (Luke 12:2)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: yoe

Whatever happened to nominating someone because of their judicial experience?


8 posted on 05/11/2010 6:49:58 AM PDT by reagan_fanatic (Never trust anyone who points their ass at God while praying.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Carley
Being a homosexual is now a tool which helps Democrats get confirmed. They could be corrupt. They could be anti-American. They could be a lot of bad things -- but the media will divert all criticism and just say "You oppose her because she's gay."

Conservatives should stay away from this topic and just hammer her on her bad policies and bad associations. She's much more vulnerable there.

9 posted on 05/11/2010 6:52:26 AM PDT by ClearCase_guy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: yoe
"would please much of his base" by nominating Kagan, because she would be the "first openly gay justice."

This is what we (America) have come to? Putting bull-dyke sex deviates in a position to advance their deviant interpretations of what the Framers intent was?

Gimme a break....we don't need no more stinkin' politically-correct lawmakers OR interpreters.

10 posted on 05/11/2010 6:54:13 AM PDT by traditional1 ("Don't gotsta worry 'bout no mo'gage, don't gotsta worry 'bout no gas; Obama gonna take care o' me!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy

Agree completely.


11 posted on 05/11/2010 6:55:54 AM PDT by Carley (WE CAN SEE NOVEMBER FROM OUR HOUSE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: reagan_fanatic

A lot of Supreme Court justices have not even been lawyers, let alone judges. Her lack of judicial experience would normally be a point in her favor. However law school experience more than cancels that out, imo. alos, her seeming lack of respect for the language of the Constitution.


12 posted on 05/11/2010 6:55:59 AM PDT by Daveinyork
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: reagan_fanatic
Whatever happened to nominating someone because of their judicial experience?

We can't ask Ted Kennedy, so maybe Robert Bork could answer that question.

13 posted on 05/11/2010 6:58:05 AM PDT by Michael.SF. (Even Hitler had Government run health care, but at least he got the Olympics for Germany)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: yoe

“No, really...that’s Bob Costas in drag, isn’t it?”


14 posted on 05/11/2010 6:59:57 AM PDT by RichInOC (No! BAD Rich! (What'd I say?))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Genoa
Call me sentimental, but I look at morality when assessing the fitness of anyone for a position of leadership. I'm just funny that way.

I was told, on this forum that it was unconstitutional to consider someone's religion when voting for president.

Ignorance abounds, even here.

15 posted on 05/11/2010 7:02:21 AM PDT by Graybeard58 (No Romney,No Mark Kirk (Illinois), not now, not ever!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: yoe

0bama is being consistent with his SCOTUS nominees. Of course they are anti-constitutional Leftists. But they are also both very, very ugly.
Instead of the traditional black robe for Kagan, might I suggest a Burka. That way zero can placate his homosexual, feminist and Muslim base all at the same time.


16 posted on 05/11/2010 7:02:58 AM PDT by grumpygresh (Democrats delenda est)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yoe

Oy.....we can always count on this topic to bring out the ignorami.

Grow up already, people.


17 posted on 05/11/2010 7:03:44 AM PDT by MIlle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RC2
After November, he will have to just sit in his office and wonder where it all went.

On the floor, whimpering in a corner. I envision legs crossed at the ankles, knees apart with elbows on them, head in hands.

18 posted on 05/11/2010 7:04:39 AM PDT by nina0113
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: nina0113

Once he realizes that he won’t be re-elected, watch him carefully. He will be more dangerous than he is now. He will have nothing left to loose.


19 posted on 05/11/2010 7:07:44 AM PDT by RC2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Dead Corpse

I don't care what she does in her private life. Seriously.

However, she's no Friend of the Constitution and as such has no place in our Government much less sitting on the Supreme Court.

Precisely. Further, most of us profess that we don't care what gays do in private, as long as they just shut up about it. Seems to me this "whispering" about her sexuality indicates that's exactly her approach, and these conjectures run counter to that.

Now let's have a spirited discussion of her qualifications.

20 posted on 05/11/2010 7:07:52 AM PDT by norge (The amiable dunce is back, wearing a skirt and high heels.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-63 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson