Posted on 05/11/2010 6:10:18 PM PDT by FrdmLvr
WASHINGTON Calling Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan "an activist who wants to govern from the bench," Joseph Farah today announced the launching of a two-pronged campaign to block her confirmation in the U.S. Senate.
"Kagan is a radical anti-military and pro-abortion zealot," said Farah. "This selection by Barack Obama reveals once again his extremist agenda of leaving America undefended, elevating alternative lifestyles to sainthood and exterminating the most innocent human life with reckless abandon and persecuting anyone who tried to stand in the way. In a nutshell, that's who Elena Kagan is."
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
During the Clarence Thomas confirmation we hear of his every sexual proclivity. Anita Hill accused him of sexual harassment. Now it is our turn!!
I WANT TO KNOW ALL ABOUT HER SEXUAL ACTIVITY!! I WANT TO KNOW IF SHE SEXUALLY HARASSED ANY WOMEN!! Bring it all out just like they did with the great Clarence Thomas and no damned mercy!!
Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies
Count me in. This person is unfit to serve on the Supreme Court.
I think the Republicans should bring out the newest, youngest-looking judge they can find, and sue Kagan for discrimination. The point being, if this greenhorn spent even one day on the bench, and decided one case, he’s more qualified...

From David Horowitz's
FrontPageMag.com/DiscoverTheNetworks.org
PROFILE: ELENA KAGAN
As an undergraduate at Princeton, Kagan wrote a senior thesis titled
"To the Final Conflict: Socialism in New York City, 1900-1933."
In the "Acknowledgments" section of her work, she specifically thanked her brother Marc, whose involvement in radical causes led me to explore the history of American radicalism in the hope of clarifying my own political ideas. In the body of the thesis, Kagan wrote:
"In our own times, a coherent socialist movement is nowhere to be found in the United States. Americans are more likely to speak of a golden past than of a golden future, of capitalisms glories than of socialisms greatness. Conformity overrides dissent; the desire to conserve has overwhelmed the urge to alter. Such a state of affairs cries out for explanation. Why, in a society by no means perfect, has a radical party never attained the status of a major political force? Why, in particular, did the socialist movement never become an alternative to the nations established parties?...
"Through its own internal feuding, then, the SP [Socialist Party] exhausted itself forever and further reduced labor radicalism in New York to the position of marginality and insignificance from which it has never recovered. The story is a sad but also a chastening one for those who, more than half a century after socialisms decline, still wish to change America. Radicals have often succumbed to the devastating bane of sectarianism; it is easier, after all, to fight ones fellows than it is to battle an entrenched and powerful foe. Yet if the history of Local New York shows anything, it is that American radicals cannot afford to become their own worst enemies. In unity lies their only hope."Lots more on Kagan here:
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=2398
>> And a petition in opposition to an ugly,Marxist lesbian being appointed to the SCOTUS is gonna do anything?
It generates hits for someone’s website.
Other than that, nada.
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.