The Power of the SCOTUS II: "Release the Kagan!"

[WeWantMore]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS II: "Release the Kagan!"

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504564_1...50-504564.html
It'll be interesting how she treats the hearings, which she called a "vapid and hollow charade" and a "farce".

She better not duck any questions, making statements like that.

This has to be a shot at Roberts right?

"She identified a specific justice who she thought was not appropriate in responses," said Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Specter after he met with Kagan. "I'm not going to tell you who it was, but I'm going to take a look at that record in preparation for the questioning."

[Patman]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS II: "Release the Kagan!"

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...operty-rights/

Interesting read. I like the fact that she takes a more sane approach to personal property. I still can't believe the court sided with eminent domain on that...

I read that article on the train ride home tonight (somebody left the paper on the seat) which sparked my comments... not bad from DC's moderate paper.

[jmh]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS II: "Release the Kagan!"

I read that article on the train ride home tonight (somebody left the paper on the seat) which sparked my comments... not bad from DC's moderate paper.

"moderate"? Uhhh, no.

[dxmnkd316]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS II: "Release the Kagan!"

I read that article on the train ride home tonight (somebody left the paper on the seat) which sparked my comments... not bad from DC's moderate paper.

For me, it's property rights that always gets my goat. I take a somewhat Lockean approach to property rights.

[Patman]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS II: "Release the Kagan!"

"moderate"? Uhhh, no.

what? its between of the left paper (the Post) and the right paper (the Examiner)... its the definition of moderate

Remember this the next time we talk about moderates. If liberals don't play fair then neither shall I.

[amherstblackbear]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS II: "Release the Kagan!"

Why don't we just call it what it is. The Daily Moonie.

[Patman]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS II: "Release the Kagan!"

Why don't we just call it what it is. The Daily Moonie.

in either case its DC's moderate paper and should be respected as such.

[Kepler]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS II: "Release the Kagan!"

He wasn't seriously tested, though. He only had to last through two terms of republican rule. Now if McCain had won, and Stevens had to survive another 8 years before retiring, that would have been impressive.

Stevens' "test" was he should have retired around 1998. He definitely stayed on throughout Shrub's nuclear winter as a stall tactic. Justices seem to be doing that more and more. The Court is highly politicized (I know, no sh it).

The Washington Times is, as Patman knows, toilet paper. There's more intelligent political commentary in the Boston Herald or the New York Post, and that's about as low as the print bar gets. He's just playing games.

[Bakunin]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS II: "Release the Kagan!"

Stevens was already 80 when Bush was elected! If Obama wins a second term, at the end of that term Scalia will be 80, and then he'll have to stay on the Court another eight years after that to be as old as Stevens was when he announced his retirement.

80 is the new 70.

[amherstblackbear]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS II: "Release the Kagan!"

in either case its DC's moderate paper and should be respected as such.

You've been around these parts way too long for anyone to believe you're a relativist.

D.C. has two conservative newspapers.

[Patman]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS II: "Release the Kagan!"

You've been around these parts way too long for anyone to believe you're a relativist.

D.C. has two conservative newspapers.

Yes, but its between the one on the left and the one on the right... so its moderate. If this is the working definition of the Democratic party then its mine too. You see, I have been around way too long... long enough to notice its a label and image game... whatever you can get people to believe and no less. My goal is to spin the Wash Times as the moderate paper. Sorta like how universal health care is a "moderate" ideal. All in the spin and what you want to believe.

Its not that I don't recognize moderates... moderates take positions "in the middle"... the problem with that idea is that if one stakes out an extreme plank then what you want or accept becomes moderate. So, why not work this in reverse. Lets polarize further in the direction I want... but I won't call it that. I suppose the problem here is that nobody here reflexively believes that I'm reasonable. But, if you did then I would stake out a further extreme position because I know you'll jump when a "moderate" takes the "middle" position.

That being said, thankfully the Examiner changes the game... and makes the Washington Times the moderate paper.

[Priceless]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS II: "Release the Kagan!"

My goal is to spin the Wash Times as the moderate paper.

Thanks for the warning.

I suppose the problem here is that nobody here reflexively believes that I'm reasonable.

Of course people do. That's why the stock market tanked after health care passed...just like reasonable you said it would.

[amherstblackbear]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS II: "Release the Kagan!"

No offense, but it sounds a little Don Quixote to me.

You know too much math to equate median with a quality like moderation.

Besides, both parties do this sort of thing all the time.

[Bakunin]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS II: "Release the Kagan!"

That's why the stock market tanked after health care passed...just like reasonable you said it would.

A government power grab on health care is the least of the stock market's concerns right now. Government defaults and the potential collapse of the Euro? Slightly bigger worries.

[LynahFan]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS II: "Release the Kagan!"

Yes, but its between the one on the left and the one on the right... so its moderate. If this is the working definition of the Democratic party then its mine too. You see, I have been around way too long... long enough to notice its a label and image game... whatever you can get people to believe and no less. My goal is to spin the Wash Times as the moderate paper. Sorta like how universal health care is a "moderate" ideal. All in the spin and what you want to believe.

Its not that I don't recognize moderates... moderates take positions "in the middle"... the problem with that idea is that if one stakes out an extreme plank then what you want or accept becomes moderate. So, why not work this in reverse. Lets polarize further in the direction I want... but I won't call it that. I suppose the problem here is that nobody here reflexively believes that I'm reasonable. But, if you did then I would stake out a further extreme position because I know you'll jump when a "moderate" takes the "middle" position.

That being said, thankfully the Examiner changes the game... and makes the Washington Times the moderate paper.

I expect more out of a stats man like you. If there's one paper at -10 and another at +10, and somebody starts one up at +11, the +10 paper doesn't suddenly get to claim the mantle of "moderate." Completely preposterous.

Between != middle.