Elena Kagan tied to Goldman Sachs. Goldman on the Supreme Court?

[LittleBlue]

WASHINGTON—The White House said Friday that Elena Kagan's membership on an advisory panel for the securities firm Goldman Sachs Group Inc. wouldn't disqualify her for a position on the Supreme Court.

Ms. Kagan, the solicitor general, is considered a top contender to replace retiring Justice John Paul Stevens. President Barack Obama is expected to announce his nomination next week. An announcement could come "at any moment," White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said Friday.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703338004575230602921084726.html?mod=WSJ_WSJ_US_News_5

Oh for God's sake. We have Goldman running the Treasury, now they get nominees to the Supreme Court?

I'm sorry, but any ties to Goldman should disqualify her. There is just too much stink with people connected to that company.

[Dinger]

1. 1...2...3...4...

:popcorn:

[gateley]

2. I agree, although it may not be fair, especially since the latest Supreme Court

ruling. We'd have to add her to that picture of the Supremes with logos on their robes.

[Bitwit1234]

3. Every body keeps telling Obama to cross her off

BUT I think Emannuel and Getner or how ever you spell those names, are hell bent to put her on. They knew this. They wanted to make sure the conservative bent to the court wouldn't be watered down. I think she should be crossed off permanently. If Obama appoints this woman we know he is just out to appease the republicans and we as Democrats, Progressives and Liberals should bombard his office and ask him why in the hell did we as the left elect him. Only to appease and do what republicans want.

[NorthCarolina]

4. The time to bombard Obama is BEFORE the appointment,

not that he cares much what Liberals/Progressives think anyway, but it positively won't do any good to bombard him after the appointment has been made.

[LittleBlue]

6. If he nominates Kagan, I will not hold my nose and vote D

I wanted no war, but was told to hold my nose and vote for healthcare reform. I was disappointed with healthcare, and they told me to hold my nose for the Supreme Court.

Hell no! If they give Goldman a vote on the court, I will not vote. At that point, who cares whether this country goes down the shitter by bank (D) or oil company (R). To hell with it.

[Thrill]

5. Shes a weak pick. And it has nothing to do with her role with Goldman

Very disappointing pick

[LittleBlue]

7. No, there are other things, but Goldman ties aren't 'nothing'

The indefinite detention thing is bad. But I'll be damned to support anyone taking Goldman money on the SC.

[boston bean]

8. Suck it up, we need Obama to make a terrible pick to quell the uproar of the repugs and gain some

moderate rw voters.


You are in the minority and should just go with the flow, it's not like most democrats believe in corporatism and such bullshit, but we gotta toe the line to win some elections, and not just toe it, but enact and appoint right winger corporatists so we can win a victory and be just like, like like REAGANs coalition.

Screw the populist message that would carry the day! WE WANT MORE RW CORPORATISM from DEMS!

[CreekDog]

9. i just realized you were being sarcastic

by the way, when we put up a Republican-style health care reform bill, did we win over moderate rw voters? no.

[boppers]

10. Hey, our SoS is bought and paid for by Wal-Mart, so why not?

Personally, I'd be happier if Google got the supreme court seat, or maybe Apple.