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.
Non-story written by those who have no understanding of how and why one writes a thesis.
Granted, my dissertation concerns an area of study focused on engineering and computer science rather than a liberal arts graduate degree, but the citation is not used to discredit socialism in her thesis. Rather it appears to lament the demise of socialist "radicalism". It's little wonder why political science, psychology, and other touchy feely graduate programs are looked down upon by those who study REAL subjects.
I read your link about the thesis, now how about you reading my New York Times link about it? It makes the point that right-wingers only focus on the first and last few paragraphs in the 130 page thesis and without having read her entire thesis on Socialism in NYC in 1900-1923 it gives a misleading view of what she actually wrote about in the body of the paper. This, the article author concludes, is why the paper never came up in the hearings. It makes for great right-wing talk fodder but nothing is really there....
I'm looking at her thesis in the context of her life events and goals. She never held a job in private industry, and has surrounded herself with ivory tower residents. This would not be a problem if she was actually held a judicial position for a period of time. Sorry, I know way too many people in my academic circle to know that overexposure to its halls stagnates the brain and creates an atmosphere for cognitive dysfunction. She's too one dimensional for my tastes.
I'm looking at her thesis in the context of her life events and goals. She never held a job in private industry, and has surrounded herself with ivory tower residents. This would not be a problem if she was actually held a judicial position for a period of time. Sorry, I know way too many people in my academic circle to know that overexposure to its halls stagnates the brain and creates an atmosphere for cognitive dysfunction. She's too one dimensional for my tastes.
So in other words, you won't read a link not posted at right wing site.
Holding a judicial position is not a job requirement for a reason.
So in other words, you won't read a link not posted at right wing site.
I read the link you posted before you even posted your response. If you'll notice, the image was taken from that site.
Quote:
Holding a judicial position is not a job requirement for a reason.
Most nominees were judges in lower courts for a period of their lives. It's unorthodox for someone outside that circle to be considered. It's especially dangerous for someone who has a flat one-dimensional academic career and has written papers on very controversial topics. A topic I might add based on a form of government that is directly responsible for more deaths than any other movement in history, including religion.
Great link. Anyone with a brain knows she is a dangerous radical and has no buisness being on the Supreme Court. However, we are in Obamaland now, where "sense" is nonsense.
1. what is the wisdom in appointing a "judge" with no judicial experience? Does one hire an airline pilot who has only driven a bus?
2. When one bars the military from the campus of Harvard, one knows in advance what her position is toward the military
3. When one associates and idolizes radicals, do you not think that reflects her core values, which will influence ALL of her decisions?
4. Can a raical lesbian be trusted with being objective with regard to cases involving the gay agenda at the expense of objectivity for all?
Kagan mirrors Obama's myopic academic background, which probably makes her look attractive for the job. Neither has stepped outside the halls of their ivory tower and worthless coffee shop roundtables to actually implement their ideas in the real world. There is nothing wrong with a highly educated person by any means (part of the reason why I returned to finish my Ph. D. after a 5 year stint in private industry), but without the qualifications of being a former justice in some capacity or any sort of private industry expertise to help understand the implications of judicial decisions on free market enterprise, Kagan's resume lacks breadth.
This woman (and I use the term loosely) is a bloody troll. She is without question the worst nominee for the court in the HISTORY of this country, and she is an ideological plant to be the swing vote on a court that just upheld the 2nd amendment by one skinny vote.
Her dancing and dodging the questions regarding her personal views on unalienable rights (claiming she doesn't have a personal view) should send shivers down the spine of any thoughtful American who values constitutional protections.
But .. her confirmation is a foregone conclusion, with these hearings nothing but a dog and pony show from a fraudulent group of congressional pimps.
History will record the death of the US Constitution with the confirmation of this godless, soulless anti-American troll.
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.
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.
