kcinsu Posted May 11, 2010 Share Posted May 11, 2010 ... Or is the resemblance truly uncanny? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest disparaissant Posted May 11, 2010 Share Posted May 11, 2010 omfgwtf how did i not even notice that before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoodie Posted May 11, 2010 Share Posted May 11, 2010 obama disappointed me a lot with this. in fact, he's been consistently disappointing me for the last few months. he should stop sucking the cock of conservative values, that shit ain't healthy. but back to kagan... glenn greenwald's been writing some really convincing articles on her: http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/index.html they're good reads. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest disparaissant Posted May 11, 2010 Share Posted May 11, 2010 obama disappointed me a lot with this. in fact, he's been consistently disappointing me for the last few months. he should stop sucking the cock of conservative values, that shit ain't healthy. for real, 6 years of being buggered by bush and a majority and the best the democrats can muster is... spreading their cheeks a little more. not a spine among 'em. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jules Posted May 11, 2010 Share Posted May 11, 2010 Lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
azatoth Posted May 11, 2010 Share Posted May 11, 2010 she looks like a lesbian. it's obama playing that high-dimensional political chess or something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mafted Posted May 11, 2010 Share Posted May 11, 2010 yep, she sure does. ..................................... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Fishtank Posted May 11, 2010 Share Posted May 11, 2010 no, no, she's John Lovitz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest disparaissant Posted May 11, 2010 Share Posted May 11, 2010 it stinks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ramses Posted May 11, 2010 Share Posted May 11, 2010 no, no, she's John Lovitz Hahahah, nailed it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
acidphakist Posted May 11, 2010 Share Posted May 11, 2010 Speaking of which, I'd like to personally thank the Brits for one of the best comedies ever: "Peep Show". I watched the fuck out of it on Hulu and I am looking for the DVDs for later season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joshuatxuk Posted May 11, 2010 Share Posted May 11, 2010 no, no, she's John Lovitz Hahahah, nailed it! That's exactly what I thought when I saw her! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joshuatxuk Posted May 11, 2010 Share Posted May 11, 2010 This isn't a huge deal in regards to policy-making and such, but kind of odd nonetheless... http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=126435731 --- Eight justices have Ivy League law degrees, which explains this joking response when a law student asked Roberts if too many justices came from elite schools. No, the chief justice said, "Some went to Yale." The only non-Ivy Leaguer, Justice John Paul Stevens, is leaving the court at the end of this term; he graduated from Northwestern. "Three justices on the current court were born or raised in New York City Brooklyn-born Ruth Bader Ginsburg; Antonin Scalia, raised in Queens; and Bronx native Sonia Sotomayor. Manhattan-born Kagan would make four, but Obama could make the case for a certain geographical diversity all the same. Of the city's five boroughs, only Staten Island would be unrepresented." --- At least she's not Harriet Meirs, anyone remember that bullshit? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest thepilot Posted May 11, 2010 Share Posted May 11, 2010 Obama seems to really want to please everyone in the name of legacy but all this is really doing is preventing him from accomplishing anything truly substantial. In twenty years is anyone going to give a shit about the rainbow of diversity that seems to be at the center of his administrative decisions? Meanwhile his presidency is a slightly bluer doppelganger of his predecessor. Any thoughts of reelection status as of now? anyone? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest 277: 930-933 Posted May 11, 2010 Share Posted May 11, 2010 obama disappointed me a lot with this. in fact, he's been consistently disappointing me for the last few months. he should stop sucking the cock of conservative values, that shit ain't healthy. but back to kagan... glenn greenwald's been writing some really convincing articles on her: http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/index.html they're good reads. This is absolutely not true. It's nearly impossible to tell what side these people will lean to based on their previous political colours. Look at Stevens, who Kagan is supposed to replace, he was appointed by Ford and turned out to be a Nightmare for the Republicans. Souter was appointed by Bush in 1990, women's rights organizations heavily protested because he would be too conservative...he's supported every single pro abortion law since. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joshuatxuk Posted May 11, 2010 Share Posted May 11, 2010 Obama seems to really want to please everyone in the name of legacy but all this is really doing is preventing him from accomplishing anything truly substantial. In twenty years is anyone going to give a shit about the rainbow of diversity that seems to be at the center of his administrative decisions? Meanwhile his presidency is a slightly bluer doppelganger of his predecessor. Any thoughts of reelection status as of now? anyone? If he goes up against a truly backwards tea party-patronizing Republican, I'll probably vote for him as the lesser evil. If I even vote. Palin and some of these other right wingers are a lot more frightening than McCain, who I think would of kept the status quo of W once he was in office. It's sadly not going to be like the U.K. where there is at least a truly progressive third party, and conservatives who, while arguably as bad as the GOP, can actually make articulate, logical statements. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
karmakramer Posted May 11, 2010 Share Posted May 11, 2010 Obama seems bent on pleasing a crowd which hates him regardless of what he does Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joshuatxuk Posted May 11, 2010 Share Posted May 11, 2010 obama disappointed me a lot with this. in fact, he's been consistently disappointing me for the last few months. he should stop sucking the cock of conservative values, that shit ain't healthy. but back to kagan... glenn greenwald's been writing some really convincing articles on her: http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/index.html they're good reads. This is absolutely not true. It's nearly impossible to tell what side these people will lean to based on their previous political colours. Look at Stevens, who Kagan is supposed to replace, he was appointed by Ford and turned out to be a Nightmare for the Republicans. Souter was appointed by Bush in 1990, women's rights organizations heavily protested because he would be too conservative...he's supported every single pro abortion law since. Good point. O'Conner is another example of a very unpredictable judge once elected. And let's not forget that Clarence Thomas, who definitely had the least priviledged upbringing on the court (homeless as a kid, parents were direct descendents of slaves), is the most conservative. That's why I hate the idea of "diversity" as criterea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awepittance Posted May 11, 2010 Share Posted May 11, 2010 obama disappointed me a lot with this. in fact, he's been consistently disappointing me for the last few months. he should stop sucking the cock of conservative values, that shit ain't healthy. but back to kagan... glenn greenwald's been writing some really convincing articles on her: http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/index.html they're good reads. This is absolutely not true. what specifically in Glenn Greenwald's articles did you find absolutely not true? and congrats to Greenwald who is basically hitting mainstream right now, his Kagen article totally went viral and is actually causing some real heat towards the whitehouse. 2 of Bush's supreme court nominees were embraced by conservatives because they were clearly conservative and held conservative values. 1 of them was rejected by almost the entire republican party, Harriet Miers because they weren't sure she was conservative enough. It seems though that as a whole, the democrats and liberals in this country are ok will full on centrism and don't want to put the heat on Obama to pick someone overtly liberal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awepittance Posted May 11, 2010 Share Posted May 11, 2010 this made me lol in 1995 she said this in 1995, she rightly excoriated the Supreme Court confirmation process as a "vapid and hollow charade" because nominees refuse to answer any meaningful questions about what they think or believe. Kagan argued that "it is an embarrassment that Senators do not insist that any nominee reveal what kind of Justice she would make, by disclosing her views on important legal issues." in 2010 Elena Kagan no longer thinks Supreme Court nominees should have to answer direct questions The White House Monday said that Supreme Court nominee won't follow her own advice from 1995 in answering questions on specific legal cases or issues, supporting Kagan’s flip flop on the issue that she first made a year ago. Kagan wrote in 1995 that the confirmation process had become a "charade" because nominees were not answering direct questions, and said they should have to do so. But during a briefing with reporters in the White House, Ron Klain, a top legal adviser to Vice President Joe Biden who played a key role in helping President Obama choose Kagan, said that she no longer holds this opinion. . . . "She was asked about it and said that both the passage of time and her perspective as a nominee had given her a new appreciation and respect for the difficulty of being a nominee, and the need to answer questions carefully," Klain said, prompting laughter from a few reporters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
karmakramer Posted May 11, 2010 Share Posted May 11, 2010 I am beginning to believe more strongly that another economic crisis is coming, Obama is trying to bring the country together in hope the crisis doesn't causes a massive civil war. Cause lets face it, if the right wingers do go insane, specifically all these "militias", liberals really stand no chance. Welcome to 1940 Germany Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest theSun Posted May 11, 2010 Share Posted May 11, 2010 what we need is a single group to round up and persecute. mexicans? gays? hipsters? women? what'll it be? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sneaksta303 Posted May 11, 2010 Share Posted May 11, 2010 christians duh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jules Posted May 11, 2010 Share Posted May 11, 2010 Let's have a witch hunt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest disparaissant Posted May 11, 2010 Share Posted May 11, 2010 uhm that group is obviously already gonna be mexicans. and really, im not too worried about the militia nuts. there are MAYBE a few hundred who are actually competent in any way, shape, or form. i can outrun the rest, and i'm not worried about their aim. it takes a certain kind of person to be a militia nut, and most of those certain types of people are fat, stupid, and overconfident. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.