... let's hear it!



Liberal elitist minions at Harvard applaud Kagan's nomination.


According to an explosive special report on Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan's views on the First Amendment right to free speech, in September of 2009 Kagan encouraged the Court to adhere to a new philosophy on the First Amendment that would allow the government to censor posters, pamphlets, and TV and radio content--and the Internet.
In a stunning news report issued today by CNS, the following information was disclosed:

“The Government urges us in this case to uphold a direct prohibition on political speech. It asks us to embrace a theory of the First Amendment that would allow censorship not only of television and radio broadcasts, but of pamphlets, posters, the Internet, and virtually any other medium that corporations and unions might find useful in expressing their views on matters of public concern,” wrote Roberts. “Its theory, if accepted, would empower the Government to prohibit newspapers from running editorials or opinion pieces supporting or opposing candidates for office, so long as the newspapers were owned by corporations—as the major ones are. First Amendment rights could be confined to individuals, subverting the vibrant public discourse that is at the foundation of our democracy.”

Even liberal Justice Ginsberg questioned Kagan about the policy, inquiring as to whether or not the same principle could be used to ban books:

When the court heard oral arguments in the case again on Sept. 9, 2009, Kagan personally made the case for the administration. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg asked Kagan if the administration stood by its position that the government could ban books.

“May I ask you one question that was highlighted in the prior argument, and that was if Congress could say no TV and radio ads, could it also say no newspaper ads, no campaign biographies?” asked Ginsburg. “Last time the answer was, yes, Congress could, but it didn't. Is that--is that still the government's answer?”

Kagan told Ginsburg that the administration had changed its position. It now believed that although the law itself allowed the government to ban corporations from publishing books, it believed that if the government actually tried to do so a litigant would have a good case challenging that prohibition in court.

“The government's answer has changed, Justice Ginsburg,” said Kagan. “It is still true that BCRA [section] 203, which is the only statute involved in this case, does not apply to books or anything other than broadcast. 441b does, on its face, apply to other media. And we took what the Court--what the Court's--the Court's own reaction to some of those other hypotheticals very seriously. We went back, we considered the matter carefully, and the government's view is that although 441b does cover full-length books, that there would be quite good as-applied challenge to any attempt to apply 441b in that context."

Thus, it is clear that the nomination of Elena Kagan to the U.S. Supreme Court is intended, in part, to bolster the Obama Administration's intention to censor the Internet, radio and TV, posters and pamphlets, and, as an extension, books, despite Kagan's claim that books would be protected from government bans.
The very fact that this is an issue revolving around a Supreme Court nominee points to a very disturbing aspect of this Administration that has gotten lost in the whirlwind of other issues--the frontal attack on free speech.

__________________

While I never expect to be satisfied with a Democrat president's SCOTUS choices, I think this one is beyond bad-enough to be rejected by the Senate.

__________________
Whoever said there's nothing more expensive than a cheap Mercedes never had a cheap Jaguar.

83 300D Turbo with manual conversion, early W126 vented front rotors and H4 headlights 400,xxx miles
08 Suzuki GSX-R600 M4 Slip-on 22,xxx miles
88 Jaguar XJS V12 94,xxx miles. Work in progress.

she's an, angry, scheming, power-obsessed bulldyke. (there, i said it) (and i'm the "left" guy, supposedly.) she's part of obama's old boy network, and she's a neoconservative masquerading as a progressive. forget the constitution (what's left of it), it's toast.

__________________
"The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread."

What an odd turn of events....

The case La Rondo cites is Citizens United and the Republicans were dancing for joy when the Supreams ruled the way they did. Many Republicans were shocked that Kagan would argue the way she did since her argument was stright out of the Republican playbook.

As US Solicitor General it was her job to argue the position of the Administration that free speech is free speech even if it is contained in a movie that is very anti-Hillery. As you might recall this film was so anti-Hillery that no network would show it since it was, at the time, considered an illigal campaign advertisement.

The court then went over the line with its' decision and declared that not only was free speech free speech but that corporations are just like people not only in free speech but in every other matter.

I asked a hard core Republican friend of mine how a corporation could have the same standing as a human when it has no soul?

He said he did not know the answer to that, but his side had won so it did not matter.

Am I the only one who seems this?

__________________
68 280SL - 70 280SL - 70 300SEL 3.5 - 72 350SL - 72 280SEL 4.5 - 72 220 - 72 220D - 73 450SL - 84 230GE - 87 200TD - 90 190E 2.0 - 03 G500

Nissan GTR - Nissan Skyline GTS25T - Toyota GTFour - Rover Mini - Toyota Land Cruiser HJ60 - Cadillac Eldorado - BMW E30 - BMW 135i

Can we make a who would you rather do poll?

__________________
68 280SL - 70 280SL - 70 300SEL 3.5 - 72 350SL - 72 280SEL 4.5 - 72 220 - 72 220D - 73 450SL - 84 230GE - 87 200TD - 90 190E 2.0 - 03 G500

Nissan GTR - Nissan Skyline GTS25T - Toyota GTFour - Rover Mini - Toyota Land Cruiser HJ60 - Cadillac Eldorado - BMW E30 - BMW 135i

An amazing resemblance.

I may be showing my lack of pop culture here, but who is the guy?

Kevin James, most known for playing Doug on The King of Queens, he was also a main character in Hitch with Will Smith, and he started as/still is as a stand up comedian.

__________________
68 280SL - 70 280SL - 70 300SEL 3.5 - 72 350SL - 72 280SEL 4.5 - 72 220 - 72 220D - 73 450SL - 84 230GE - 87 200TD - 90 190E 2.0 - 03 G500

Nissan GTR - Nissan Skyline GTS25T - Toyota GTFour - Rover Mini - Toyota Land Cruiser HJ60 - Cadillac Eldorado - BMW E30 - BMW 135i

My nomination.. Crackpot religious minions rejoice !! Gay marriage will NEVER pass !!!!

__________________
Sharing my partner's 2012 Forte 5dr SX til I find my next 123 or 126..
-
Do I miss being a service advisor ???

Because a corporation is owned by people and serves the collective interests of all of them?

Advisorguy: I can't be the only one with no idea who that is. Any clues?

__________________
Whoever said there's nothing more expensive than a cheap Mercedes never had a cheap Jaguar.

83 300D Turbo with manual conversion, early W126 vented front rotors and H4 headlights 400,xxx miles
08 Suzuki GSX-R600 M4 Slip-on 22,xxx miles
88 Jaguar XJS V12 94,xxx miles. Work in progress.

George Rekers... If you still don't know who that is.. Read here: http://www.dallasvoice.com/instant-tea/2010/05/04/anti-gay-activist-george-reker-outed-after-hiring-male-escort-from-rentboy-com/

__________________
Sharing my partner's 2012 Forte 5dr SX til I find my next 123 or 126..
-
Do I miss being a service advisor ???

I see. Thanks for the laugh

__________________
Whoever said there's nothing more expensive than a cheap Mercedes never had a cheap Jaguar.

83 300D Turbo with manual conversion, early W126 vented front rotors and H4 headlights 400,xxx miles
08 Suzuki GSX-R600 M4 Slip-on 22,xxx miles
88 Jaguar XJS V12 94,xxx miles. Work in progress.

Am I the only one who thinks Kagan looks like an overweight Mike Meyers?

Why do you or any one else care what she looks like? Were you planing on dating her? Are people so superficial that they believe appearance is more important than substance? I remember reading article and one thing that I recall them saying is that people mistrust a person with a facial hair. As far as I have been able to find, no modern politician has any facial hair when in public office. How asinine is that?

Secondly, why is it that women need to be attractive to hold public office but the men do not? Sexism and a double standard is alive and well in this nation.

__________________
Sent from an agnostic abacus

2014 C250 21,XXX my new DD ** 2013 GLK 350 18,000 Wife's new DD**

- With out god, life is everything.
- God is an ever receding pocket of scientific ignorance that's getting smaller and smaller as time moves on..." Neil DeGrasse Tyson
- You can pray for me, I'll think for you.
- When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.

making a joke, dont get your undies in a wad...light hearted thread..

Kagan does not have a lot of writings out there to analyze, but she does seem to be a little free & easy on the first amendment....there, is that better?