• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should The Senate Confirm Elena Kagan

Should the Senate Confirm Elena Kagan


  • Total voters
    49

Redress

Liberal Fascist For Life!
Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 5, 2008
Messages
106,343
Reaction score
50,345
Location
Georgia
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Simple question, but please explain why.
 

The Mark

Sporadic insanity normal.
Supporting Member
Monthly Subscriber
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 9, 2005
Messages
25,484
Reaction score
6,304
Location
Pennsylvania
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
Poll: Should the Seante Confirm Elena Kagan.
I don't know... Does the "seante" have any power to deny her the seat?

:mrgreen:
 

Redress

Liberal Fascist For Life!
Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 5, 2008
Messages
106,343
Reaction score
50,345
Location
Georgia
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
I don't know... Does the "seante" have any power to deny her the seat?

:mrgreen:
I am still trying to figure out how to edit that....
 

tacomancer

Big Scary Liberal
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
39,848
Reaction score
20,683
Location
Akron
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
I am still trying to figure out how to edit that....
I guess you can do it the same way you fixed that poll for me last month.
 

Redress

Liberal Fascist For Life!
Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 5, 2008
Messages
106,343
Reaction score
50,345
Location
Georgia
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
HAH! Figured it out, now on to the question...
 

tacomancer

Big Scary Liberal
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
39,848
Reaction score
20,683
Location
Akron
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
HAH! Figured it out, now on to the question...
Confirm probably should not be capitalized. Also, it lacks a question mark.
 

Barbbtx

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 7, 2010
Messages
8,467
Reaction score
1,993
Location
W'Ford TX
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
I voted no but it makes no difference. She is going to be confirmed.
I said no for several reasons.
She sounded like she would use foreign law as a reason to make certain rulings though she didn't come right out and say so.
She wouldn't come out and say that a law requiring you to eat 3 vegetables and 3 fruits a day would be unconstitutional. I realize WHY she wouldn't (mandatory purchase of healthcare) that she will probably be ruling on in the future) but that really bothered me.
Also her replacement of words in a memo about partial birth abortion while in the Clinton administration.
I feel that she would make rulings on precedents more than on what the constitution says.
 

The Mark

Sporadic insanity normal.
Supporting Member
Monthly Subscriber
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 9, 2005
Messages
25,484
Reaction score
6,304
Location
Pennsylvania
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
I voted no.

Because from what I've heard about her, we could do far better in choosing a member of the highest court in the country.

But perhaps I am wrong.
 

molten_dragon

Anti-Hypocrite
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 24, 2009
Messages
10,114
Reaction score
4,744
Location
Southeast Michigan
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
Yes, they should confirm her. She is qualified for the position and that's the only thing they should be making their judgment upon.
 

Kandahar

Enemy Combatant
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 20, 2005
Messages
20,688
Reaction score
7,320
Location
Washington, DC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Yes she should. She is qualified, intelligent, and has no disqualifying characteristics which I am aware of. Generally I think the Senate should let the president appoint whoever he wants, as long as they meet those criteria and aren't too far outside the judicial mainstream. (Cue comparisons of Kagan to Chairman Mao...now. :mrgreen:)
 

zimmer

Educating the Ignorant
Suspended
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 19, 2008
Messages
23,745
Reaction score
7,654
Location
Worldwide
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
I don't think she will use the Constitution as a base to make her decisions.

.
 

winston53660

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 29, 2007
Messages
29,265
Reaction score
10,128
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I don't think she will use the Constitution as a base to make her decisions.

.
Really?

“There is no federal constitutional right to same-sex marriage.”

Solicitor general confirmation hearing, 2009
.........
 

samsmart

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 7, 2009
Messages
10,316
Reaction score
6,470
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Simple question, but please explain why.
No. She supports more power to the executive branch of government. On an impersonal level, the Senate should not confirm her simply because she will take more power away from it and the House of Representatives and give it to the President. On a personal level, I think the President has far too much power already, and we should try to support checks and balances between branches, not tear it away. Realistically, I think the Senate will confirm her because if she does give the President more power as a Supreme Court Justice that will give fewer responsibilities to them, which means they can blame more things on the President when they run for office instead of accept responsibility themselves.
 

jamesrage

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
34,340
Reaction score
16,230
Location
A place where common sense exists
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative

TurtleDude

warrior of the wetlands
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
244,362
Reaction score
73,449
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Yes she should. She is qualified, intelligent, and has no disqualifying characteristics which I am aware of. Generally I think the Senate should let the president appoint whoever he wants, as long as they meet those criteria and aren't too far outside the judicial mainstream. (Cue comparisons of Kagan to Chairman Mao...now. :mrgreen:)
I normally would agree with you

but using Obama's standards concerning the far more qualified Roberts and Alito the answer is no
 

Ockham

Noblesse oblige
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2009
Messages
23,909
Reaction score
11,001
Location
New Jersey
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Should they? No.

Will they? Yes.


Why? Because Kagan will endorse and move forward the ideology of the Congressional majority and the current President. When the majority changes and when the President changes she will continue to endorse and move forward that ideology. She is not qualified in my opinion... but when ideology is at stake, the Constitution comes second or third. :shrug:
 

peepnklown

Frankernaut
Joined
Jan 21, 2009
Messages
607
Reaction score
177
Location
California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
The US Senate and Elena Kagan have no working foundation of the US Constitution thus this will be a match made in hell.
 

molten_dragon

Anti-Hypocrite
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 24, 2009
Messages
10,114
Reaction score
4,744
Location
Southeast Michigan
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
I normally would agree with you

but using Obama's standards concerning the far more qualified Roberts and Alito the answer is no
I don't find myself agreeing with you very often on here TurtleDude, but I do in this case. It annoys me to no end when either party does this crap. One of the perks of being president is getting to choose judges that are in-line with your political beliefs. I didn't agree with Roberts's and Alito's views on a lot of things, but they were certainly well qualified for the job, and as far as I'm concerned that's the only thing the senate should be basing their judgment upon (I realize of course that this will never happen though).
 

mac

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 13, 2010
Messages
22,499
Reaction score
4,266
Location
DC Metro
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Simple question, but please explain why.
A member of the supreme court should have a reputation for impartial judgement. Though as dean of Harvard Law (I think it was) she obviously has a profound knowledge of the law, but with no track record as a judge it's impossible to gauge her impartiality.
 

the makeout hobo

Rockin' In The Free World
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 13, 2006
Messages
7,102
Reaction score
1,504
Location
Sacramento, CA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
I think someone with a background other than a judge would be refreshing. Justices from all sorts of backgrounds have gone on to be effective at their job.
 
Top Bottom