Posted on 06/20/2010 3:52:09 PM PDT by apillar
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said early indications of some of Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan's positions have been "quite troubling," and he left open the option of a judicial filibuster.
McConnell said in April that a filibuster of the nominee, unknown at that point, would be "highly unlikely, however, unless the nominee is an extraordinary individual outside the mainstream with really bizarre views."
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
Stupid Mitch, I trust he will NOT do anything in regards to Kagan. Anyone wanna bet?
From David Horowitz's
FrontPageMag.com/DiscoverTheNetworks.org
PROFILE: ELENA KAGAN
When it was announced in 2008 that Cass Sunstein would be joining the Harvard Law School faculty, Kagan said:
"Cass Sunstein is the preeminent legal scholar of our time -- the most wide-ranging, the most prolific, the most cited, and the most influential. His work in any one of the fields he pursues -- administrative law and policy, constitutional law and theory, behavioral economics and law, environmental law, to name a non-exhaustive few -- would put him in the very front ranks of legal scholars; the combination is singular and breathtaking."
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=2398
_________________________________________________
From David Horowitz's
FrontPageMag.com/DiscoverTheNetworks.org
PROFILE: CASS SUNSTEIN
________________________________________________________________________________________
[Cass Sunstein on Socialism and "wealth redistribution"]:
________________________________________________________________________________________
Sunstein has argued in favor of bringing socialism (in the form of expanded wefare benefits and wealth redistribution) to the United States, but contends that the country's "white majority" opposes such a development because of deep-seated racism:
"The absence of a European-style social welfare state is certainly connected with the widespread perception among the white majority that the relevant programs would disproportionately benefit African Americans (and more recently Hispanics)."
Sunstein depicts socialist nations as being more committed than their capitalist counterparts to the welfare of their own citizens:
"During the Cold War, the debate about [social welfare] guarantees took the form of pervasive disagreement between the United States and its communist adversaries. Americans emphasized the importance of civil and political liberties, above all free speech and freedom of religion, while communist nations stressed the right to a job, health care, and a social minimum."In 2007 Sunstein co-authored (with fellow attorney Eric A. Posner) a 39-page University of Chicago Law School paper titled "Climate Change Justice," which held that it was "desirable" for America to pay "justice" to poorer nations by entering into a compensation agreement that would result in a financial loss for the United States. The paper refers several times to "distributive justice."
________________________________________________________________________________________
[Cass Sunstein on "Climate Change" and "distributive justice"]:
________________________________________________________________________________________
Sunstein and Posner further speculate about the possibility of achieving this redistribution by means other than direct payments:
[snip]
________________________________________________________________________________________
[Cass Sunstein on the "Fairness Doctrine" (restricting opposing political views)]:
________________________________________________________________________________________
Also in The Partial Constitution, Sunstein promotes the notion of a "First Amendment New Deal" in the form of a new "Fairness Doctrine" that would authorize a panel of "nonpartisan experts" to ensure that a "diversity of view[s]" is presented on the airwaves.
[snip]
________________________________________________________________________________________
[Cass Sunstein on federally-funded abortions]:
________________________________________________________________________________________
With regard to citizens who object to having their tax dollars finance abortions, Sunstein writes:
"There would be no tension with the establishment clause if people with religious or other objections were forced to pay for that procedure (abortion). Indeed, taxpayers are often forced to pay for things - national defense, welfare, certain forms of art, and others - to which they have powerful moral and even religious objections."
Lots more on Cass Sunstein here:
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=2422
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________From David Horowitz's
FrontPageMag.com/DiscoverTheNetworks.org
PROFILE: ELENA KAGAN
- Served as President Bill Clinton's Associate White House Counsel
- Former dean of Harvard Law School
- Sought to overturn the Solomon Amendment, a law that denies federal funding to any university that bars military recruiters from its campus
- Believes that the military should open its ranks and barracks to homosexuals, without restriction
- Was appointed U.S. Solicitor General by President Barack Obama in January 2009
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
I agree. McConnell will chicken out, just as he always does.
McConnell is still waiting to have a backbone inserted.
Can anyone remember a Republican Senate leader that didn't wuss out? I can't.
The only way you could could simulate a backbone in Mitch would be to run a broom stick up his rear end.
His wussy index seems to have no limit.
Fighting for a principle. What an peculiar, archaic concept.
Was there ever any question this person was extreme?
Mitch the Chinless may be forced to act after all...but I doubt it.
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.