& The Choice To Replace Justice Stevens Is Elena Kagan

Elena Kagan has a brilliant mind and would be a good counterpoint to Justice Scalia. Hopefully she could counteract the four conservative activists on the court and possibly move Justice Kennedy to the center on a few decisions.

However, as a civil libertarian, I have some serious questions about her views concerning free speech and the government's ability to regulate speech that does not present a clear and present danger. I also have a problem with her arguing that battlefield law, including indefinite detention of suspected terrorists could apply outside of traditional battlefields.

I wish President Obama had nominated a true progressive like Pamela Karlan or Kathleen Sullivan to replace justice Stevens, but I realize Obama is not a progressive. He is a centrist who is always trying to build a consensus across the aisle.

Obama is simply spineless, I believe, and uses "consensus building" as an excuse to avoid having to fight for anything of consequence.

AutumnalTone wrote:Obama is simply spineless, I believe, and uses "consensus building" as an excuse to avoid having to fight for anything of consequence.

Rapidly coming to the same conclusion.

I'm not. I believe that he sees the anger and rage between the 2 parties who absolutely refuse to compromise with each other for the good of the country and/or its people and the anger and rage from the Tea Baggers who are trying to oust anyone who has crossed the lines just as I do. I am concerned about it. I don't want a president who tries to ride roughshod over the conservatives. I believe that it will lead to even more extremist behavior.

Of course by trying to steer a middle of the road path, in the current environment, he will not please anyone.

gillyflower wrote:I'm not. I believe that he sees the anger and rage between the 2 parties who absolutely refuse to compromise with each other for the good of the country and/or its people and the anger and rage from the Tea Baggers who are trying to oust anyone who has crossed the lines just as I do. I am concerned about it. I don't want a president who tries to ride roughshod over the conservatives. I believe that it will lead to even more extremist behavior.

Of course by trying to steer a middle of the road path, in the current environment, he will not please anyone.

Actually, he has pleased at least one American voter...me.

It's about damn time that today's politicians took a few lessons from the past, from men like Barry Goldwater and George McGovern who would compromise for the good of the country instead of erupting in divisive histrionics over virtually every vote.

I see Obama as being closer to those two men in how he attempts to work cooperatively with both parties.

We could use a helluva lot more compromise in the federal government, seems to me. Maybe Obama can move Washington politics more in that direction than has been the case in previous administrations.

Obama's compromises haven't been good for the country, though. He can also work with both sides of the aisle while fighting for significant change.

Ah, well, he'll be gone after the next election as he's lost the support of a great many people who supported him. He doesn't have the support within his party that he had during the last election and nowhere near the same support from those of us outside his party.

Looks like the Republicans are going to get the chance to muck things up worse in '12. I can only hope we get a good candidate in '16 who actually has a spine when it comes time to clean up the messes.

I don't really know about that. My daughter who was laid off has good jobs coming her way now. My life is good, houses are selling in my neighborhood again and I think that things are turning around. I believe that within a year it will be okay to be openly gay and in the military. Sure, we don't get everything we want and don't get it immediately but I do see change happening.

I really think it is a little early to write Obama off especially since no other candidate has risen with a lot of backing. I think that he will have a good chance. I am sure that there a people who are thoroughly disillusioned because he was not able to change everything in the first year or two but I am not one of them.

I'll probably be voting Repub come '12. Assuming of course the world doesn't end.

Social progress is good, but I say this hoping and praying a financial conservative comes along who can realize that we've spent out country out of control, and we are already in the process of prostituting ourselves out for cash.

Not another Bush II, who thinks money is as free as air.

I'd have to see who was running against him in '12.

I don't like him, and never did, but Palin sacred me, and I figured the job would kill McCain in less then a year.

He really was the lesser of two evils.

all

Exactly. What landed him my support in the election was the selection of Palin on the McCain ticket.

And I never expected Obama to fix everything in short order. I did expect him to begin setting the groundwork for major changes, to announce his intentions and actively begin working towards those changes, and to actually enact those changes he could that didn't require Congressional action. The notable lack of all that, coupled with his continuance of many disastrous Bush policies, leads me to consider him a mediocre President, at best (being better than W isn't much of a distinction). He certainly hasn't been good enough for me to consider voting for him again.

As for economic matters, Bush took a thriving economy and surplus and tossed it out the window. In the short term--such as now--government spending is what is necessary to get things working well again, so I'm not much concerned about the current budget or the next couple. Once the economy gets working, then it's time to work on reduction of debt and such.

I'm socially liberal and fiscally conservative, which is why I've been a member of each major party at some point and independent most of the time. The GOP, despite how loudly it claims to be the party of fiscal responsibility, hasn't shown any such inclination from the Reagan administration onward, so I no longer buy into that bit of puffery. And being rabidly anti-tax isn't being fiscally responsible, it just shows ignorance of (or denial of) how economies work.

I only expected him not to be McCain/Palin. At that, at least, he has succeeded.

I think the stuff that got all the peoples hopes up was kind of unfeasible anyway.

See? you guys voted for him rather than Palin as the lesser of the evils. Which means you never really were supporters of him. You probably don't think that allowing gays to serve in the military is important or a major change. I do so I'm happy that is happening. It is what I expected from him. It will do a great deal towards helping gays get equal rights in the states.

I was an Obama supporter and I don't feel that he ripped me off or is not following through on the things that I expected of him, like putting centralists on the Supreme Court and trying to improve the economy. I will support Obama in the next election, too. (Always with the caveat that I can change my mind.) I hope that you all can find candidates that you will like better.

gillyflower wrote:See? you guys voted for him rather than Palin as the lesser of the evils. Which means you never really were supporters of him. You probably don't think that allowing gays to serve in the military is important or a major change. I do so I'm happy that is happening. It is what I expected from him. It will do a great deal towards helping gays get equal rights in the states.

I was an Obama supporter and I don't feel that he ripped me off or is not following through on the things that I expected of him, like putting centralists on the Supreme Court and trying to improve the economy. I will support Obama in the next election, too. (Always with the caveat that I can change my mind.) I hope that you all can find candidates that you will like better.

Actually, I'm sad to say that I'm just used to not being represented. I'm jaded and cynical.

I thought the rule against homosexuals serving in the military was stupid and couldn't understand why we had it in the first place. I tend to think that with most rules that limit behavior, or limit based on behavior.

all

gillyflower wrote:See? you guys voted for him rather than Palin as the lesser of the evils. Which means you never really were supporters of him. You probably don't think that allowing gays to serve in the military is important or a major change. I do so I'm happy that is happening. It is what I expected from him. It will do a great deal towards helping gays get equal rights in the states.

Bingo.

Social issues are the things that are important to me in times of relative peace, financial prosperity and when everything's sailing smooth. For this election, the economy, war and healthcare were heaviest on my mind. No, I was a Ron Paul grassroot campaigner, not an Obama fan. I liked Hillary more, on the dem ticket. I probably could have voted for Hillary with no guilt. Fact is, if she didn't have a vagina, she'd be in office.

If Hilary had won the nomination, I'd have voted for her, too.

With me, being the age I am, and a bit cynical, I feel that MEN have been messing up the budget and entering wars for some 200+ years. The names and parties change and they keep doing it. Look at the newspapers from 200+ years ago like I do and you will find men talk, talk, talking about the budget ad nauseum and no one has yet to fix it and talk, talk, talk about the current war, too. I don't think that men can do it, either balance the budget or keep us out of war. Perhaps when we get a majority of women in the government it will happen but I'm not going to hold my breath on that one.

The thing that has happened over my lifetime is social change. I got to see people of color earn the right to drink from the same water fountain and use the same toilet as I do. (Although not at the same time!) I've seen women take control of their ovaries and enter the work force. None of it is perfect. I'll be the first to admit that we fall far short of anything like equality. But social change is possible and I feel that it is worth working for. Now is the time for gays to get more rights and to initiate some health care reform. I don't expect any of it to be perfect but it will, in my opinion, be steps in the right direction. I don't know of any other politician (presidential candidate) who is interested in social reforms and equality for a diverse population.

Oh, yes and I'd work for marijuana reforms too.

You're such a misandrist. But it's okay, we like ya.

My biggest concerns are keeping the rights we DO have, for however long. Like the right to protect ourselves, and the right to use alternative medicine... both have people trying to rip them apart.

TigersEyeDowsing wrote:You're such a misandrist. But it's okay, we like ya.

My biggest concerns are keeping the rights we DO have, for however long. Like the right to protect ourselves, and the right to use alternative medicine... both have people trying to rip them apart.

I want to keep the rights that we do have, and I want to affect social change that allows us to function without the artificial limits placed on us.

Kind of puts me right smack in the middle.

all

allthegoodnamesweretaken wrote:I'd have to see who was running against him in '12.

I don't like him, and never did, but Palin sacred me, and I figured the job would kill McCain in less then a year.

He really was the lesser of two evils.

all

A lot of people took the same approach. Palin was the only VP candidate in about a century who was an active drag on their ticket.

It was a big blunder.

I can see the thought process. He was trying to court the more radical conservatives, and pick up any Hilary supporters that were voting for her just because she was a woman.

Then Palin opened her mouth.

all

So true.

gillyflower wrote:
"I was an Obama supporter and I don't feel that he ripped me off"

Yeah, well, the difference in the election came from us independent voters throwing our support to Obama, both to avoid Palin being close to the Oval Office and on the promises of fundamental change in direction. Have fun trying to re-elect him without that support, as data shows he's losing the support of independents rapidly.

Here's the thing, even if Palin gets the GOP nomination in '12, I won't be voting for Obama. Perhaps the nightmare of a Palin presidency will be what it takes for any candidate talking about serious change to actually mean what he or she says.

I hope you find yourself a candidate that suits you.

AutumnalTone wrote:

gillyflower wrote:
"I was an Obama supporter and I don't feel that he ripped me off"

Yeah, well, the difference in the election came from us independent voters throwing our support to Obama, both to avoid Palin being close to the Oval Office and on the promises of fundamental change in direction. Have fun trying to re-elect him without that support, as data shows he's losing the support of independents rapidly.

Here's the thing, even if Palin gets the GOP nomination in '12, I won't be voting for Obama. Perhaps the nightmare of a Palin presidency will be what it takes for any candidate talking about serious change to actually mean what he or she says.

Palin won't run: she's a Fox employee now.

I should think she was enough of a laughingstock last election that she wouldn't want to be demonstrated to be an idiot again.

I think that she believes that there is no such thing as bad publicity. (thank you Brendan Behan)