All this Hand-Wringing about Kagan is Pointless, a Waste of Time!

[The Damned]

Could she be our Souter? Sure, it's possible. But let's face facts: Nobody really knows what ANY nominee will actually do once they're on the Court!

It has been pointed out several times on DU recently that John Paul Stevens was appointed by Gerald Ford. And we all know the story of Eisenhower and Warren. So, bottom line: President Obama has chosen her, she will be confirmed, and we need to get used to it and stop reacting to things that haven't even happened yet!

[Syrinx]

1. I think I would have preferred Pamela Karlan

But Kagan doesn't seem so bad.

[AllentownJake]

2. You are right

The focus should be on the real possibility of having to primary the President in 2012 for his terrible HR skills in hiring people.

[jaxx]

5. And who will be the primary opponent?

Joe Lieberman?

[AllentownJake]

8. We will have to wait and see won't we

Who was going to be Hillary's primary opponent, that guy who gave the convention speech and had been in the Senate for only 3 years.

;-)

There is a vacuum of leadership, it will be filled, whether it wins the primary or not is another question. He keeps this course, he will have a challenger.

Afterall, Ken Salazar has as much responsibility for what happened in the Gulf right now as Dick Cheney and W.

He approved that rig, with the full knowledge of the current regulatory environment created by his predecessors.

When it comes to actually analyzing what caused something, I take my partisan blinders off and am willing to criticize the party I tend to vote for as much as the one I think is batshit insane. If anything, they are more accountable, because they should know better.

[jaxx]

9. So this is a vendetta of sorts?

Interesting.

[AllentownJake]

11. You don't reward bad policy decisions with a renomination

or at least a fight to take power from someone who should know better, but continually doesn't.

Tim Geithner, Gates, Larry Summers, Rahm, Ken Salazar etc are people I would not vote for, I don't see why I should vote for their boss to continue in a primary if these are the type of people he chooses.

I certainly would have not voted for him or helped him in the primary in 2008 if I knew these were the individuals he'd surround himself with.

[jaxx]

13. Then it is a vendetta.

I understand, he (the POTUS) hasn't fulfilled your wishes. But I don't think the people you mentioned are up for your vote at any given time.

[AllentownJake]

14. No it is called democracy

I didn't like George W. Bush, because I thought his policies were shit was that a vendetta as well?

Barack Obama is not entitled to that office or the nomination, and if he wants it, he will have to justify why he deserves 4 more years in that office in 2012 in both a primary and a general election.

[jaxx]

17. Dubya wasn't a Democrat.

He was the opposition party. Undermining the Democratic Party is another story. There are many phases to the workings of this country, and it's way too soon to put thumbs down on everything because of a few things that haven't met the wishes of some. He hasn't met all my wishes, but the thought of giving the election to the rightwing to spite my face isn't somewhere I'm going.

[AllentownJake]

20. I have as much loyalty to the party

as it has to my beliefs.

The party is a tool, not the end all be all of the world. If the tool is not working you work to fix the tool, if that doesn't work, you look for a new tool.

At the end of the day, I have my beliefs, not the democratic party. Its beliefs has changed over time, and I will leave it in a heartbeat if it no longer represents what I believe.

By your logic, I should be supporting segregationist in the south in 1960.

[jaxx]

23. If that works for you, it's a free country.

I just know that I will fight to make sure no republican gets his/her hands on this country for a very long time. The past 8 years are still too fresh in my mind, the things done, the lies, the blatant in your face bull. I didn't vote for a tool, I voted for the best representative to get this country moving again....and that is being done. One claw mark at a time, slow but sure.

[AllentownJake]

26. Yeah I don't see that

but more power to you.

The thing I find funny about all that is going on right now, is the President has remarkable powers to set a few things right, but he won't and his reasoning for it, is amusing to say the least.

[jaxx]

36. When you edit and add inflamatory items, it's time to let you go

and stop the back and forth. "By your logic, I should be supporting segregationist in the south in 1960." Which up to this time hasn't been bad.

No thanks, I don't play games.

[AllentownJake]

39. I edited before you responded

Timestamps are your friend.

Next ridiculous accusation or statement to try to discredit or get me back on the reservation?

11:18 my edit, 11:21 your response....if you were typing while I added, my apologies but you should really check such things before you make accusations.

[jaxx]

41. I was typing.

Apology accepted.

[AllentownJake]

43. Check the timestamps next time please

before putting bad intent on a person.

Thank you.

[BzaDem]

22. There was someone in the primary that was more liberal than Obama.

He got a few percent of the vote. If being part of that few percent makes you feel good inside, more power to you.

(Of course, you are assuming that his policy decisions by and large are somehow "bad" (as opposed to good). But even accepting that assumption as true for the moment, with an 85+% approval rating among Democrats, most Democrats clearly would be rewarding what they feel are good decisions.)

[AllentownJake]

24. That is fine

If he wins he wins, and I make a decision how to mark my ballot based on that in a General Election.

He has to earn my vote for re-election. He hasn't earned it yet.

[BzaDem]

28. "He has to earn my vote for re-election."

Meh. Maybe in the short term, people who have no idea how good they have it will vote for some third party in the general election and the Republican will win. But 4 years later, you will come scurrying back to vote for the Democrat, even if that Democrat is much more conservative than Obama (notwithstanding you denying this at the present).

[AllentownJake]

31. Probably not

I probably will simply stop caring about politics and focus on other things because I will have realized the game is rigged.

[BzaDem]

33. I don't believe you. But whatever.

The reality of a Republican president has a way of focusing the mind in a way that a Democratic president doesn't. (See Nader's vote share dropping by 90% in 2004.)

[BzaDem]

21. Obama is the most progressive president since LBJ.

Have you ever considered that maybe, instead of Obama and his administration being wrong/terrible/whatever (and by extension, Hillary and Bill Clinton and Carter, who were more conservative on many issues), it is you that is in fact wrong?

I mean, no one is stopping you from getting your hopes up about an inevitably failed primary challenger. But I think you should re-examine your frame of reference (though I doubt you will). That is probably not the most productive use of one's time.

[AllentownJake]

27. He's to the right of Nixon on most issues

:rofl:

[BzaDem]

30. So? How does that change my statement at all, even if it were true? n/t

[AllentownJake]

34. He isn't that progressive

We have witnessed the biggest wealth transfer in the history of mankind on his watch, with his economic policies in reaction to the bad policies of his predecessor.

I look at facts and what is actually going on. Not the skittle shitting unicorns.

Here is the deal, the President has the power to do a shit load about these bankster, he won't, they fund his operations in election years.

This BP thing, they approved this off shore drilling before the announcement with full knowledge of the regulatory environment.

His appointments are straight out of the shock doctorine in Defense, Treasury, Interior, and Education. A lot of privatization talks being bandied about.

His deficit task force, refuses to look at the biggest line item in the federal budget.

So I ask you where is the liberalism? A transgender person appointed to some small department somewhere is not my idea of a progressive God.

[BzaDem]

37. You are comparing Obama to some utopian president that doesn't exist and hasn't existed in decades.

I am comparing him to actual Presidents.

If the logical ending point of your philosophy is that Carter, Clinton, and Obama should not have been elected (and third parties should have been voted for instead), then it is your philosophy that is the problem, not Carter/Clinton/Obama.

Just because you really, really want a president that doesn't accept any money from say the financial industry, doesn't mean you are ever going to get such a president. (Though I encourage you to look up what percentage of Obama's fundraising came from the financial industry if you think he is somehow beholden to it because of said contributions.)

If by "rigged," you mean that we have a two party system, we have always had a two party system, and that we always will have a two party system (unless the Constitution is changed to remove winner-take-all), then the game has been "rigged" for over 200 years and this should be a surprise to nobody. And frankly, you know this, yet still vote anyway (which is why I really don't believe that the next 4 years of a Republican won't bring you back into the Democratic fold very quickly).

[AllentownJake]

38. Well I see no reason than to be involved in this mess than

If this is the only answer. I will let them destroy my country, the democrats slower than the GOP, but destroy it none the less.

The funny thing about what I stated, is you didn't say that what I said wasn't true, you said that is the way it has to be, and that is more troubling about your mindset, than mine.

[BzaDem]

40. My mindset is that there is a difference between what I want and what I am going to get.

Your mindset is that there is no difference (or that there being a difference is a cause for a tantrum). Usually people learn that there is a difference at age 5 or earlier.

(I don't believe most of what you said about Obama's positions is true, though even if I did that still wouldn't change the above.)

[AllentownJake]

42. Oh, I know there is a difference

If my choice is to get punched in the face or punched in the gut, I may vote which one I prefer, I however am not going to give money or volunteer to be punched pretending it was a kiss.

[AndyA]

45. You are supposed to support the Democrat if for no other reason than they

aren't quite as bad as the Republican.

And that is getting old.

So what if they make promises they don't keep.

So what if they cover up crimes of a previous administration.

So what if they compromise the SCOTUS for the rest of our lives by moving it further right.

So what if they want to take away more of our civil rights.

So what if they are allowing discrimination to take place.

So what if they are catering to big business at our expense.

They're not as bad as the alternative, so we should be happy, right? :eyes:

Lower your expectations far enough, and it won't matter WHO is in office. :puke:

[BzaDem]

47. While it may be getting "old," why is this surprising?

No one is saying you have to be happy.

Anyone who can read the Constitution knows that we live in a mathematical winner-take-all, two party system, and that is not going to change. The choice is always between the lesser of two evils (if you consider both choices that). It always has been, and absent a Constitutional amendment, it always will be. We do not live in a multi-party parliamentary system. This is not rocket science.

[AndyA]

48. I never said it was surprising. It's pathetic.

But I am sick and tired of the cheerleaders showing up in support of this administration, no matter what they do.

At times, it's difficult to see any "change" at all. :eyes:

[Name removed]

49. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

50. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Bluenorthwest]

56. It is also not rocket science in politics to understand that voters

must be motivated. This idea that voters don't have to be happy, and will still run around shouting 'all fired up'wearing the tee shirt and hitting the phone banks, that is just daft. You claim that unhappy voters cut checks, give time? That is like a passage from the Fairy Tale Charter.
The 2008 victories, they sprang from the hopeful energy of millions of voters. Because they were happy to hope for change. Without all of that energy and excitement, Obama would have lost. It took all of us, and all of our energies.

[BzaDem]

57. One of the most powerful motivators is a Republican president.

If people want to not vote, eventually we will get a Republican president. There is nothing more motivating to Democrats than a Republican president. Reality is the ultimate check and balance on unmotivated voters.

[Bluenorthwest]

58. Wow. For a politician that is not a good method

they want to win, not lose to teach a lesson, then win. You say 'not vote' when the subject matter is about who gets the vote, not if a vote will be cast. Silliness used as a ploy to avoid what I said. I pointed out that your notion that the electorate does not need to be happy is folly, your idea that a bitter base will still do all the needed work, all the donating that is just daft. What you are trying to foist is that the voters have nothing to do with it, and that miserable voters are just as committed as delighted voters. Again, that is just silly. Unhappy voters do not vote for that which is making them unhappy. Or, at least they don't go out of their way to do so, they do not stand in long lines in bad weather, like in 08. They do not jam the GOTV lines. They yawn and do what is easy. And winning is never easy.
If the elected officials are happy to go home rather than represent the voters, then they should go home. Democracy, that is called.

[AllentownJake]

59. The Eisenhower principle

IF you use fear to motivate you, they will hang around till they are no longer afraid.

This appears to be a winning long term strategy to selling putting the people you support into power.

:rofl:

The party should grow some balls and become what FDR built, than people might actually believe they stand for something.

[Renew Deal]

25. Go ahead

That would be amusing.

[AllentownJake]

29. Yes

It would be amusing, the minute someone polled above 20% you'd all be screaming and gnashing teeth...

[Renew Deal]

32. You should run

Since you support all of your positions. I'm sure you'd be great.

[AllentownJake]

35. Too honest

You have to be a pretty convincing con-man to be elected in this country and convince people they can have skittle shitting unicorns, and I doubt I could pull that off.

[Davis_X_Machina]

44. Kucinich! Because....

...at DU, whatever the question is, Kucinich is the answer.

[dionysus]

60. let me know when you're gonna start pimping some sacrificial lamb jake, it's gonna be a gas!

you strike me as a potential larouche man...
:rofl:

[mmonk]

3. If she will not uphold the basic premise of our constitution and Bill of Rights

and due process rights while in a position of power, she is unfit to be on the Supreme Court of the United States. It is not a matter of hand wringing. It is a matter that I oppose her on solid legal grounds and reasons.

[jaxx]

6. You know she won't do those things?

How? According to the 'experts' she is an unknown quantity. What do you know that we don't?

[mmonk]

15. Pretty much. Her words and brief filings.

Some may want to separate these from how she will be judge. I'm not one of those.

[AllentownJake]

16. Well that is all you have to go on

Of course we were all told Geithner was going to be ok, and Salazar, and Gates and if we just trust enough the unicorn will shit skittles.

[mmonk]

51. .

:rofl:

[jaxx]

18. She appears to be pretty balanced to me.

I don't see any red flags. There isn't much to go on, but ability. She has plenty of that.

[mmonk]

52. Due process is the biggest flag when it comes to law.

I do not adhere to use of law to circumvent the rule of law or the application to deny justice.

[Junkdrawer]

4. When Obama ignores his base and panders to the right, a political toll...

needs to be assessed.

[jaxx]

7. The Democratic elected president is a troll?

That's an odd assessment. Can you give us some more insight into that statement?

[AllentownJake]

10. Toll as is payment or take a hit politically

The poster never said troll.

[jaxx]

12. Ah you are correct.

Sorry poster, I was just reading along and it fit into the arena. My mistake.

Toll, not troll.

Take a hit politically. LOL yeah, I got it.

[MadHound]

19. Excuse me, but this is my country, your country, our country,

And as citizens of this country we have the right, no, the duty, to vet the president's nominations for the SC. We did the same under Bush, and the public uproar forced Harriet Miers to drop out.

If one doesn't like the nomination of Kagan, make your displeasure known, to the president, to the press and to others. This is the United States, where the people are the ultimate authority. Don't sit back and accept anything as a fait accompli. To do so is to fail in your duties of citizen of this country.

[Better Today]

46. For me it's come down to how she has handled herself since her

appointment. Based on what I heard last evening on Rachel, regarding her presentations to USSC, I'd say she isn't ready and will be a mistake if she gets confirmed, which I do not think is in the bag.

[zipplewrath]

53. Actually, history is against you

Supreme Court nominees do get stopped occasionally, even ones appointed by the majority party. The left has alot of reasons to be dissappointed in this nomination. The DLC on the other hand is probably thrilled.

[QC]

54. This is a discussion board. People discuss things here,

mostly politics and current events.

If it bothers you to see people discussing things, you might want to consider visiting sites that provide a better match to your interests and temperament.

[watercolors]

55. My thoughts also, so much flap over a done deal!

nt

[Toasterlad]

63. Really! Why Do We Bother To Complain About ANYTHING?

The government is just going to fuck us in the ass whenever they want, right? Why should we complain about it? They're going to do it anyway, right? We should all just grit our teeth and take it, like good Americans.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

61. That's a ridiculous argument

You might as well argue for picking justices at random out of the phone book.

Do you counsel people to draw to inside straights? To buy lotto tickets?

And what's with "we need to get used to it"?

Who is we? People who think very poorly? That's the only constituency you've aligned yourself with here.

[Bluenorthwest]

62. You and I are not any sort of 'we'

So you get over it, and I'll do exactly as I wish to do. Then, now and in the future.