Supreme Court Nominee

det45

Registered
Can anyone tell me how in the heck Obama's Supreme Court Nominee (Kagan) is remotely qualified to serve in the highest court in our country? If this lady never served on the bench (Not even in traffic court!) how in the world is she qualified to be a supreme court justice!? This current administration is incompetent beyond belief! I hope she does not get in......det45 :moon:
 
there are many Justices that were never judges...40 in all, with 10 Chief Justices that had not been sitting judges before being appointed to the High Court.
 
Last edited:
She has zero qualifications for the highest court in the land and has never made a legal decision in her life ?
When things like the 2nd amendment or Roe v Wade come up would we not want one familiar with the laws and the ability to decide on these things legally rather than on emotion ?
 
She has zero qualifications for the highest court in the land and has never made a legal decision in her life ?
When things like the 2nd amendment or Roe v Wade come up would we not want one familiar with the laws and the ability to decide on these things legally rather than on emotion ?

Da da da da :nono:...but wait...not this administration. Knowledge and experience is
not a requirement. Being a progressive and emotional (they go hand in hand)
is all that is required...You've got an attorney general commenting on the Arizona law...
never read it...Secretary of Homeland Security commenting...never read it...
Obama commenting on it...never read it...all of 10 pages.

That's just one example, so why would you think or assume Obama wants
a Supreme Court Justice to rule on anyting but emotions...liberal/progressive emotions...
she fits in with the rest of the staff :thumbsup:
 
36% of all Supreme Court justices have not been sitting judges......Including 10 Chief Justices.

Chief Justice Rehnquist, who was never a judge actually ruled on Roe v. Wade...

Chief Justice Warren, ruled on Brown v. Board of Education which outlawed segregation, and Miranda v. Arizona which is the reason you must be read your rights when arrested( mirandized)....and Loving v. Virginia overutrned laws that prevented inter-racial marriage.

as a matter of fact, when the Supreme Court ruled to outlaw segregation....5 of the Supreme Court Justices had never been a judge before thier appoinment to the SUpreme Court.

Chief Justice Warren, Clark, Burton, Jackson, Frankenfurter.....

Roe v. Wade was decided by the Court there were two Justices that were never judges before being appointed to the High Court....

our country has been shaped by many Supreme Court Justices that were never judges, many important laws were argued and decided by Intelligent people that had no experience of being a judge....we see cases all the time of court decisions by judges that seem to care little about the law or the Constitution....


does this mean I support this particular nominee....no, I do not know much about her, and most of you don't either....
 
36% of all Supreme Court justices have not been sitting judges......Including 10 Chief Justices.

Roe v. Wade was decided by the Court there were two Justices that were never judges before being appointed to the High Court....

our country has been shaped by many Supreme Court Justices that were never judges, many important laws were argued and decided by Intelligent people that had no experience of being a judge....we see cases all the time of court decisions by judges that seem to care little about the law or the Constitution....

does this mean I support this particular nominee....no, I do not know much about her, and most of you don't either....

Yeah, see my point....they got it very wrong :poke:
 
Last edited:
funny thing about Roe v. Wade is that 2 justices had no experience previous to the Suprem Court appointment....

and they split, one was pro abortion and one was against....

Yeah I know I figured, I looked it up but still thought I'd :poke:

(still think they got it very wrong btw)
 
If we can elect a President without any experience, I think a Supreme Court Judge is rather a moot point. :whistle:
 
Not to worry...The culture of Incompetence will be packing their bags this November 2010 & 2012......Us Tea Party Members will see to that.......det45

If we can elect a President without any experience, I think a Supreme Court Judge is rather a moot point. :whistle:
 
Last edited:
this is just another example of people being outraged...without knowing the facts.

36% of all Supreme Court Justice have had no previous experience as a judge.
 
November is still coming my friend and the fat lady will be singing, thats all the facts I need.....det45 :laugh:

this is just another example of people being outraged...without knowing the facts.

36% of all Supreme Court Justice have had no previous experience as a judge.
 
Last edited:
this is just another example of people being outraged...without knowing the facts.

36% of all Supreme Court Justice have had no previous experience as a judge.

You keep on repeating yourself. Past history doesn't make it okay.

Perhaps the reason the country is in some messes it is is now is due to the lack of experience in the courts?

I dunno. I'm an arrogant prick and with no experience as a judge, I think *I* could make better decisions than have sometimes come out of this and other high courts.

Still doesn't make it right.

--Wag--
 
Last edited:
You keep on repeating yourself. Past history doesn't make it okay.

Perhaps the reason the country is in some messes it is is now is due to the lack of experience in the courts?

I dunno. I'm an arrogant prick and with no experience as a judge, I think *I* could make better decisions than have sometimes come out of this and other high courts.

Still doesn't make it right.

--Wag--

what has the court done to ruin the country...?

they got Brown v. Board of Education right?
Miranda was pretty good...

what judgements are you talking about?
 
If it makes you feel better than so be it.....You can prove your (so called) points all day long and bloviate all day long but at the end of the day, the fat lady will be singing, will talk then my liberal friends.....det45 :laugh:

thanks for proving my point....
 
If it makes you feel better than so be it.....You can prove your (so called) points all day long and bloviate all day long but at the end of the day, the fat lady will be singing, will talk then my liberal friends.....det45 :laugh:

not a liberal.....but why let fact ruin your fantasy.
 
afterhours is more likely a libertarian based on my observations.

And I personally see nothing wrong with a smart, well rounded Supreme Court Judge that has never sat at the bench prior. I would prefer that the person be a Constitutional Scholar however, since that is the crux of the job. On the contrary, there are many judges which are incredibly unqualified for the position, so having a gavel and a black robe is not an automatic free pass either.

For the record, I feel that Kagan will be a horrible Justic, but no different than Stevens, so...meh, no balance will change.
 
afterhours is more likely a libertarian based on my observations.

And i personally see nothing wrong with a smart, well rounded supreme court judge that has never sat at the bench prior. I would prefer that the person be a constitutional scholar however, since that is the crux of the job. On the contrary, there are many judges which are incredibly unqualified for the position, so having a gavel and a black robe is not an automatic free pass either.

For the record, i feel that kagan will be a horrible justic, but no different than stevens, so...meh, no balance will change.

:beerchug: :beerchug:
 
Back
Top