Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-11-2010, 01:47 AM
 
Location: Long Island (chief in S Farmingdale)
22,180 posts, read 19,449,121 times
Reputation: 5297

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by juppiter View Post
That would really bother me, because IIRC Sotomayor got about that much and she was infinitely more qualified than Kagan.

Obama really messed up with this one
The experience thing doesn't really bother me, many members of the Supreme Court did not have much experience before they were on the bench.

Sotomayer was confirmed 68-31. Dems and the two Independents unanimously in favor, 9 Republicans voted in favor 31 against.

The 9 Republicans in favor

Alexander-TN
Bond-MO
Collins-ME
Graham-SC
Gregg-NH
Lugar-IN
Martinez-FL
Snowe-ME
Voinovich-OH

Since then Martinez has resigned replaced by Lemeiux and Brown was elected to Kennedy's old seat (this was about 3 weeks before Kennedy passed away and he did not vote)

I doubt any of the Republicans who voted against Sotomayor voted for Kagan, Brown likely votes for her, probably somewhere of a 5/4 or 6/3 split of the above (replacing Martinez with Lemeiux) vote in favor.

Other than perhaps someone missing a vote (illness or what not) she gets at least 63. I think its very unlikely any of the Democrats or the four main moderates (Collins, Snowe, Voinovich and Brown) vote against her.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-11-2010, 02:37 AM
 
Location: San Diego, CA
4,897 posts, read 8,315,282 times
Reputation: 1911
There is no question she will be confirmed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-11-2010, 04:52 AM
 
Location: MI
1,933 posts, read 1,824,546 times
Reputation: 509
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drover View Post
Maybe if she were replacing Scalia or even Kennedy. Replacing Stevens? We'll hardly notice the difference.
Yes, I say she will be confirmed. Replacing scalia and thomas will be a breath of fresh air.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-11-2010, 09:10 AM
 
Location: Georgia hope to move soon
328 posts, read 195,976 times
Reputation: 61
Lord I hope not.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-11-2010, 09:27 AM
 
Location: Londonderry, NH
41,479 posts, read 59,756,720 times
Reputation: 24863
I would be pleased if we could purge the Supreme Court of twisted jurists that believe State created organizations such as corporations are legally individuals with full Constitutional rights. In my humble opinion that is complete nonsense.

Proprietorships may be considered people, full partnerships as well, but limited liability corporations, never. They are a creation of the State to limit investor losses and as so should be subject to any limitations the State shall decree. United Mega Bank Corp is not a person.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-11-2010, 09:39 AM
 
Location: Great State of Texas
86,052 posts, read 84,442,711 times
Reputation: 27720
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregW View Post
I would be pleased if we could purge the Supreme Court of twisted jurists that believe State created organizations such as corporations are legally individuals with full Constitutional rights. In my humble opinion that is complete nonsense.

Proprietorships may be considered people, full partnerships as well, but limited liability corporations, never. They are a creation of the State to limit investor losses and as so should be subject to any limitations the State shall decree. United Mega Bank Corp is not a person.
In this day of sue-happy people, LLC's are a life savor to small business.
The LLC is a life savor not to the investor but to the small business owner.

Corporations have investors, not LLC's as LLC's don't issue stock.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-11-2010, 09:47 AM
 
Location: Londonderry, NH
41,479 posts, read 59,756,720 times
Reputation: 24863
Ok, maybe what I am annoyed with are Joint Stock Corporations. If the state limits business liability to what ever you have invested instead of your full personal fortune, you are a creation of that state and should be subject to whatever rules the state may impose. That business is NOT a person.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-11-2010, 02:33 PM
 
Location: Southcentral Kansas
44,882 posts, read 33,253,825 times
Reputation: 4269
Quote:
Originally Posted by juppiter View Post
Not only that, but she lacks experience as a judge. Obama needs to go back to the drawing board and find a progressive with ample judicial experience. And he should consider a protestant.
I agree with you that he needs to get a protestant but what law says that religion of the appointee is to be considered? Why would her lack of experience be much of a drawback since Obama had no experience in running anything other than a local group of organizers? Just kidding but throwing that in because someone will.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-11-2010, 02:36 PM
 
Location: Southcentral Kansas
44,882 posts, read 33,253,825 times
Reputation: 4269
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smash255 View Post
Yes. My guess she will get somewhere in the range of 65-68 votes or so. She will likely get unanimous support of Democrats, and the support of the four Republicans who have broken with the party the most (Collins, Snowe, Brown Voinovich) and likely a few others. Probably a couple more Republicans will vote for cloture, but not in favor of her nomination.
I think maybe you need to see my thread about Kagan's views in the Clinton administration concerning affirmative action and reverse discrimination. A very interesting case and she did herself no favors on that one.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-11-2010, 02:41 PM
 
Location: Southcentral Kansas
44,882 posts, read 33,253,825 times
Reputation: 4269
Default Smash255

Just in case you never manage to find the thread I mentioned here is the link.

CNSNews.com - Kagan Supported Policy of Reverse Discrimination, Clinton Documents Revealed
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top