1 Why doesnt someone just ask her at the hearings? they dont like dont ask dont tell so just ask her.. "Are you queer? Are you a homo? have you ever licked a snatch? do you have a woman lover? "

2 Was Kagan client #6?

3 I also don't believe Kagan gay, but I do believe she would be bad to nuzzle a few fuzzy tacos.

4 Damn, this is stupid.

5
Can a man be a beard to a lesbian, and does Alan Colmes make the cut?

6 "Are you a socialist" is the question they should ask. That and "explain why you banned armed-forces recruiters from Harvard", and also the various issues Jack M raised a day or two ago. "Oooh look! teh ghey" is the bullshit a moby would say; it poisons the well for legitimate questions.

7 As for Sullivan - fuck him with a pineapple

8 well, at least this takes Sully off the Trig Truther beat for a few hours

9 Do you adhere to the judicial philosophy of the Critical Legal Studies, Critical Race/Gender theory? She does. That is all.

10 Speaking of not gay - Am I the only one who sees subliminal breasts in the diagram of the knee in that joint pain ad?

11
Her actions in her various public offices offend me. What she does in the back of her Subaru, not so much.

12 A pineapple? One of the little ones or a big one? With extra ribbing for my pleasure hopefully

13 Well known Honest Abe Eliot Spitzer says Kagan's not gay

Could not care less, even if I was passed out in a drunken stupor.

14 Who the hell cares?

Every word uttered about this non-issue is one wasted in not attacking her pathetic defense of socialism and her shellacking by Scalia and Kennedy in the first minute of her oral arguments in Citizens United.

15 She did admit to a liking for smoking cigars.

Heh.

16 Well, it would make the hearings a little more entertaining if they had her and a partner of her choice demonstrate an orgasm in the hearing room, rather than spend days doing rhetorical dodges around the issue of her belief that the plain text of the Constitution, treaties, and statutes can change in meaning depending on the whims of society's "elite"....

17 Like Andy said, above: Who the hell cares? There are a lot of reasons to question her suitability to the post (though she seems technically qualified). Her sexual orientation is not one of those reasons, and doesn't interest me one bit.

18 well, at least this takes Sully off the Trig Truther beat for a few hours

...

Elena Kagan is Trig's true mother!!!!!!!!

19

I think Malor should have his IP address banned.

 

20 Who cares?

We have more important things to worry about.  Like when the hell is Obama going to put gas in my Jeep, pay my rent and buy my groceries?

21
Kagan's Friends: She's Not Gay, NTTAWWT

and I'm not a Moron, either...

22

Who the hell cares?

Normal people aren't sodomites.

Normal people are also vastly more likely to show fealty to the old values, like, ah, liberty.

Normal people also have enough common sense to know that sodomite = bad, bad news.

 

23 Walzer, half amused and half appalled to be discussing her friendÂ’s sexual orientation,

This seems like a strange reaction (half amused and half appalled) from a person who probably loves discussing gay issues and, I would guess, has no problem pushing a gay lifestyle into everyone's face, including kids.  But, when it is a simple question about someone who looks like the textbook example of a bull dyke, they are amused and appalled.   Given the fact that one of Kagan's most notorious and dumbest positions was involving gays in the military (for which her idiotic argument was shot down by the SCOTUS, unanimously, thereby proving that she is way out of the mainstream, even for the batshit crazy leftists currently on the Court) they are surprised that anyone would discuss the personal side of the gay issue, if just out of curiosity - as it is so "in your face".

Typical for the left.  I'm not amused by it, but certainly appalled.

24 Yeah, baby! Here's what congress is doing that's waaaaaaayyyyyy more important than Supreme Court nominee qualifications...

25 She's a man, Baby!!

26 Normal people aren't sodomites.

There are "normal" hetero-sexual married couples who like the squeak hole action. Try again.

Normal people are also vastly more likely to show fealty to the old values, like, ah, liberty.

Your the one trying to limit freedom here...

Normal people also have enough common sense to know that sodomite = bad, bad news.

I know of no definition of "sodomite" which routinely gets applied to homosexual women. Either one who enjoys sodomy, or denizen of the now destroyed city of Sodom in antiquity. Try English next time. You'll sound more credible

27

Normal people aren't sodomites.

Normal people are also vastly more likely to show fealty to the old values, like, ah, liberty.

Normal people also have enough common sense to know that sodomite = bad, bad news.

I'll take this one morons.

Blow it out your ass douchebag.

28

Does Kagan even have female genitalia? It is questions like these we need not fear but must debate, openly and proudly, in the public arena. How does she feel about male genital mutilation? As a Jew, didn't Kagan undergo this horror if the answer to the first question is "no"? I know there are some things we never will know, such as how many died in George W. Bush's satellite-based torture chambers and how it would be to bottom for the president, but isn't it fucking time we asked Kagan if she is adroit with her tongue and with whom?

If not now, when? If not Kagan, who?

If Obama doesn't come clean about this woman--if she indeed be a woman--the tension and drama will force me to turn this site over to guest bloggers. AND THAT WOULD BE WRONG WHEN SO MANY QUESTIONS REMAIN UNANSWERED...and don't get me started on Richard Gere and PETA.

 

 

29 Normal people aren't sodomites.

Normal people aren't Supreme Court Justices either...
NTTAWWTSeriously?

I should care about this precisely why?

I find her "identity" as a creature of academe far more problematic than her choice of bowling partners.

30 With a face like hers, she'd better be gay.

31

With a face like hers, she'd better be gay  asexual.

fify

Now who the hell really cares? 

32 Oh, and is Kagan a holographic image as I have come to believe Trig is? These are questions that demand not just answers but explanations from someone better placed than my weed dealer.

33

Wow - the neo-conservatism is pretty thick at AoSHQ.

I thought this was supposed to be a conservative site.

But I guess not.

Anyway, allow me to reiterate: Sodomites = bad, bad news.

Normal people have enough common sense left to realize that.

Sorry y'all neo-cons have swallowed the koolaid [hook, line, and sinker], but that's just the way it is: Sodomites = bad, bad news.

 

 

 

34 #34: I bet you've swallowed more than Kool-Aid, Skippy. Join Kagan in the sunlight.

35

He's not gay.

As with that other leftist he-man, Rachel Maddow, he likes girls.

36 Yes, this is much more important than the fact the average bailiff has more courtroom experience than a supreme court nominee.

37 J+UTa, read this.

Short version: teh ghey might not be your cup o' tea, but harping on... and on... and ON about it is unseemly.

38 Ok, first of all, Kagan is going to be confirmed.  That's 99.9% certain.  We can pretend otherwise, but really, any discussion of strategy regarding trying to stop her confirmation is academic.  So what we are left with is strictly political.  Who benefits from making this about her sexual identity?  No, not Mitt Romney...the left.  If she can be a victim of us bad ol' conservatives, they get sympathy.  She doesn't appear to need it.  In a few months, she'll be set for life in a job for which she's at least nominally qualified.  It's the rest of us, everyone who has a stake in the next two election cycles, we're the ones fighting for advantage here, and like it or not the left is in a much better position with her being in the spotlight.  If we go after her, we're bigots, if we don't, we risk turning of the neanderthals.  It's a no-win situation, well played by this White House. 

39

#39: Make that "unqualified" and drop the "nominally." The Left's whole exercise in this sexual orientation nonsense is to distract from the fact this woman makes Harriet Miers look like Oliver Wendell Holmes. I think the Senate Republicans will expose Kagan as the joke she is and she will be confirmed and it will leave a bad taste in everyone involved's mouth. I don't think the gay community will be pleased being used as Obama's whores, and those who object to them will see a reasonable attempt was made to stop her.

I'm glad such a lightweight has been nominated. Despite her fat ass she couldn't sway a bass boat in a tornado.

40 I don't think she's queer. Just the most fashion-challenged woman in the history of pants-suits. OK, I know what I and every other rational human who has laid eyes on her thinks: "Wow, what a bad hair cut!" But I really don't care. I care whether she's going to wipe her but with the Constitution or treat it like a document she swore to uphold and protect. I'm pretty sure the Constitution is going to get some s---t stains.

41 During the confirmation hearings just ask what is her golf handicap and if she can name any player in the WNBA. That'll settle the question.

42 Wow - the neo-conservatism is pretty thick at AoSHQ. Wow still struggling with the English language eh? look up neo-con some time. I don't think that word means what you think it means. Sodomite still does not apply to homosexual women BTW. You should invest in a dictionary.

43 I think she's a lovely girl.

I honestly can't understand why you are being so critical about her looks.

44 Who benefits from making this about her sexual identity?  No, not Mitt Romney...the left.  If she can be a victim of us bad ol' conservatives, they get sympathy.

Posted by: Burt TC at May 12, 2010 01:08 AM (fSQAV)

Bullshit. I think America is sick of being force fed crap that they don't like and don't want. 

45 Until Kagan's sex tape appears on the internet, I maintain she is gay.

46 Wow still struggling with the English language eh? look up neo-con some time. I don't think that word means what you think it means.

Oh, I don't know about that.

I think I know what he thinks it means...

Truth be told, I did wake up feeling kind of Jewy today.

47 " Who benefits from making this about her sexual identity?  No, not Mitt Romney...the left.  If she can be a victim of us bad ol' conservatives, they get sympathy.

Posted by: Burt TC at May 12, 2010 01:08 AM (fSQAV)

Bullshit. I think America is sick of being force fed crap that they don't like and don't want. 

Posted by: progressoverpeace"

Oh come on, man!

Obama does need to make some kind of gesture to the gay community.  And this is somehow some attempt to make one, or at least send some idea that the right hates gays or something.

And she's not even gay (officially, anyway, I kinda suspect she is gay), so there's really no 'America being force fed crap' on this issue.  Sure, she's a terrible nomination, but I wonder if anyone will really understand that until years from now.

Of course the left benefits from placating the gay community.  They are wealthier and more politically involved than the general population, by a long shot.  I think a lot of the 'we swear she isn't gay!' is a blatant attempt to imply the right is bashing her for being gay rather than the real reasons we have a problem with her.

I respect the hell out of Kagan for keeping her private life private.  I wish everyone simply refused to discuss this kind of crap.  She's a terrible nomination, but this is her private life, and I wish everyone refused to discuss that stuff.

48 I thought this was supposed to be a conservative site. we spend all day swearing at each other and trying to top each others lude sexual refereces, and you thought we would go batshit because a nominee for SCOTUS might be in with the gheys? You really don't understand this site. I'm sure there's a nice Hitler youth site for you that already thinks she should wear a pink triangle on her clothes. Don't let the door hit your ass on the way out.

49

A lot of people are wondering if Elena Kagan is gay.

Well let me definitively answer that question for you.

I know Elena.

I had sex with Elena.  Many times.

Any questions?

50 Sodomite still does not apply to homosexual women BTW. You should invest in a dictionary. Alternatively you could get laid for the first time. Then you might understand how all the pieces and parts work.

51

I had sex with Elena.  Many times.

Any questions?

Posted by: Pat at May 12, 2010 01:35 AM (OCfDT)

That's a damnable lie!

No one is closer to Elena than I.

52 >>>Of course the left benefits from placating the gay community. 

That wasn't Burt's point.  He claimed that we lose by opposing her.  We don't.  We lose by not opposing her.

>>>They are wealthier and more politically involved than the general population, by a long shot.  I think a lot of the 'we swear she isn't gay!' is a blatant attempt to imply the right is bashing her for being gay rather than the real reasons we have a problem with her.

The gay community isn't powerful.  It's loud, and it's fashionable for many to be with them, but there is no power there.  California just voted down gay marriage.  Again.

I don't think anyone cares about her gayness, but she is so obviously gay that it offends the intellect to play coy about it.  And the idea that the left are, all of a sudden, 'amused and shocked' that anyone would ask (given the pictures, I mean, sheesh) is a pathetically lame.  The same people who are gung ho for johnny applefister being the safe schools czar are too demure to acknowledge what most people can see.

>>>I respect the hell out of Kagan for keeping her private life private. 

It's other people's private lives she likes screwing around with.

>>>I wish everyone simply refused to discuss this kind of crap.  She's a terrible nomination, but this is her private life, and I wish everyone refused to discuss that stuff.

Posted by: Lex Luthor, Ruler of Australia at May 12, 2010 01:31 AM (dUOK+)

Like I said, I doubt anyone cares that she's gay, but her side has made a minor issue of it.  Beyond that, as I wrote above, her backing of one of the dumbest cases ever to come before the SCOTUS should be enough to recognize that she is not SCOTUS material, in any way.

53

This "does she or doesn't she" schtick is just a distraction. I think it is out of the dem playbook. The play: excite the bible bangers to a single issue froth about gayness. It is foolish to take the bait [got lost in the punching up/down/sideways thing so I'll stick with antiquated cliches].

There are two general lines of attack and of course the Pubs appear to only focus on one and appear ready to concede. That would be reciting the substantive grounds to reject EK, e.g., no judicial experience, no paper trail, she may be gay . . .

Logically, it is germane and  [all but the gay part] should be part of the decision. Substance is important. But why overlook the non-personal. Rather than  focus on her alone, why not focus on the process and how the Ds seek to corrupt the process. You know thats what they do.

Why even concede there is no paper trail? Isn't there one in all the Sol Gen docs. Didn't she advise President Clinton in an official capacity. Take one from the Dems and argue that the Ds are hiding the paper trail because it hasn't been produced and it is damning. Even if there is no paper trail, DEMAND it anyway. Make the Ds explain it. Ask what's the hurry. Remind the voters that we got a lot of dumb ass legislation with this hurry up routine.

Dovetails nice with the corrupt healthcare shenanagins and all the other clever BS the dems have been pulling. Even if you ultimately lose the fight, you've softened the target for November, reminding the public of the Dem sleaze factor. Remind voters of other D candidates who conveniently forget important things later. Remind the voters that Eric Holder, that profile in courage, called the American people cowards AFTER his nomination had been confirmed. [Personally it would be more courageous to call Americans cowards during the hearings, but that's just me.] The point: Dems don't tell the truth when they want something. When you're stuck with them, that's another story. So how is EK any different.

And you need to get back to substance at that point. Push into her face her 1995 law review article about the necessity of knowing the judicial philosophy of Sup Ct justices. Ask her why she's never been interested enough about it to write about it. Ask her why she believes she is above the law she professes to love so much. Ask how she mediated the JAG Harvard kerfuffle with the Pentagon since she can mediate the factions, as a bringer of peace and light. Ask her how she can objectively judge her buddy's "legacy" when it comes before the Court. Will she not hear the case if Citizen United Congressional fixes come before the court.

Where's the Tylenol?

54 Oh, please!

Elena and I have been close for years and I can assure you that I'm really her type.

55 "like I said, I doubt anyone cares that she's gay, but her side has made a minor issue of it.  Beyond that, as I wrote above, her backing of one of the dumbest cases ever to come before the SCOTUS should be enough to recognize that she is not SCOTUS material, in any way.

Posted by: progressoverpeace at May 12, 2010 01:44 AM (Qp4DT)"

Well, anyone who gives a shit to check can easily see you're right.  She's not close to qualified.  I listened to her argue a case, Citizen's United, and she comes across as a fucking idiot, and I think the Justices felt the same way.

But whether America is sick of it or not remains to be seen, and in particular, I think a lot of gays are delusional about politics and are buying the democrat's classic 'you are a victim and need us!' shtick.  Broadcasting defenses of Kagan, implying that the right hates her for lesbianism that isn't even demonstrated, probably will be the topic of many fund raising emails this week.  I bet it's at least somewhat effective.

56 Remind the voters that Eric Holder, that profile in courage, called the American people cowards AFTER his nomination had been confirmed. [Personally it would be more courageous to call Americans cowards during the hearings, but that's just me.]

Well, to be honest, during the hearings I kind of assumed that the low character of the American people was pretty much understood as a given by that audience.

Preaching to the choir and all that...

But, probably a fair criticism.  I shall take that under advisement.

57 Nevermind the gay thing, if she's friends with Spitzer that's a strike against her.

58 Nah, we need a lesbian on the court, diversity and all that you know. Next year we'll need a transgendered. The year after that a flasher. The year after that ... Ah, you get the picture. Republicans? Filibuster? Fight Obama? Stand up for the Constitution? Republicans???? You must have some other "Republicans" in mind. Our Republicans couldn't filibuster William Ayers and Bernedette Dorn! Obama could nominate Jeremiah Wright and the Republicans would say, "Well, he has the right to pick his own court."

59 I can accept her orientation. I'm broad-minded. If she's left-handed, that's OK with me.

60 Fuck this sexuality bullshit.

Watch her getting pwned in her only Supreme Court appearance and tell me if she's fit for the highest court in the land.

61 logprof, that's exactly my point from waaaayyyy above. She got her ass handed to her in Citizens United. Then her President made a complete douche of himself (well, to be fair, he started out as a complete douche) over the same case in the SOTU.

They do seem to be birds of a feather. My only question at this point is which of the two has a worse understanding of the facts of the case.

62 The batting stance doesn't lie...

63 I'm really more concerned that she naturally sticks to the fucking law when judging than I am about judging whether she sticks to nature's law when fucking.

64

 It saw Andrew Sullivan waging a campaign to out Kagan (safe link) and actually suggesting that she shouldn't be confirmed unless she is forced out of the closet.

No one knows if she's gay, and they're just assuming it based on her looks or something.  ?   That's fucking creepy.  "Forced out of the closet" because he knows.  Right.

65

She's not a Socialist either.

///

66 Dis ugmo bits could capsize Guam at de tick part. Bits is lezbeen. Hap to be. Bits could be mezcan bassador. Send dem all run souf where dey beez from. Hep us out.

67 Is she a lesbian or just so ugly and manlike that she's a celibate hetero. There I said it. AND WHO THE FUCK CARES?

68 This is an effort by supporters to change the discussion from the fact that she is totally unqualified to a stupid diatribe on her "gayness".

69 I pray we never know a single thing ever about her sex life. Never ever.

70 What difference does it make? She would be approved if she was an advance scout from a distant planet, ascertaining the best way to conquer this planet. BTW, what's with the obsession with gayness on this website? It's weird.

71 For the young and/or ignorant who came of age in the post-Elton John era: the issue is about truth, not about perversity. Nowadays, it's OK, even celebrated, to be a pervert. So far, it is still not OK to lie about it. I'll say it again: if she's not a dyke, I'll eat my shorts.

72 Kagan 's was Provider #2, 4, 9, and 121.

73 This makes it worse. Letting her "friends" do the talking is very deceptive. She should be addressing this herself so it can be put to rest. Instead we have intense political maneuvering to gain/maintain support from various "groups", something we do not need in a real judge.They are quickly turning this into a horrible mess.

74 I watched the "panel" discussion on Fox this morning. As usual the Dems outnumbered the Republicans 2-0 and there was one self-avowed libertarian.

The Dems told one lie after another and they all went unanswered. Yes, she will get nominated in a cakewalk because the RINOs will bend over to kiss her ass and the rest will stick to the pussy meme "this is not a battle to fight".

75 Because, as Andrew Sullivan knows, every woman who plays softball is gay.

76

Andrew Sulivan....vagina checker.

 

Bwahahahaha!

77

Shocking footage of Elena Kagan playing in a band!

78

Best Straightener...

Good thread for that spam.

To the point:

I.

Don't.

Care.

79

She did it like this, she did it like that, she did it with a whiffle ball bat.

80 Some of her political positions are starting to leak out.  She considers our Constitution a "defective document" and should not be regarded in any way whatsoever.  She is firmly against free speech.  She has a soft spot for socialism.....thinks that is the way to go.
I think those all qualify her as a no vote from our senate. 

81 I the fuck care. (forgot who asked). It matters and it certainly matters that she lets people lie for her.

82 Well, I've always thought softball was pretty gay, but not in that way.

83 Caligula attempted to appoint his foavorite horse, Incitatus (?sp), a priest and consul, so Odumbo the first, the munificent, gets to appoint this horse's ass justice of the Supreme court. 

84 The only issue I'd have with this (were it even true-frankly, who knows for sure) is how it influences her thinking on the bench - is she looking to "correct" the "omissions" in the Constitution regarding homosexuality (e.g. will she keep finding more rights that aren't there) ? She clerked for Marshall who often said he thought the Constitution was "defective" and needed to be "fixed." The problem with Marshall's approach was that the 13th and 14th amendments had fixed it with respect to slavery long before Justice Marshall came along. The American people fixed it, not Thurgood Marshall. That's how the system works. Marshall felt his experiences as a black man and a former NAACP lawyer uniquely qualified him to DIY some more renovations. Clarence Thomas on the other hand approaches the Constitution and our laws as a judge, not a "black judge" - and in stark contrast to his "wise" new colleague. If a justice is a member of any of our society's so-called "protected" classes, it raises legitimate questions about whether they'll go Sotomayor on issues to "change" past "injustices" - without respect for existing law and without respect for the mechanisms by which change is supposed to occur - such as asking the people first.

85 At this point I'm thinking the whole "She's a dyke" meme is a rope-a-dope designed to paint opponents of her as a bunch of homophobes.  A similar strategy worked for Klinton during impeachment...

86 76 Vic: Other than all the Republicans going on the record and saying she sucks, what else can they do ? I'd like to see them vote against her 100% but it won't matter in the end - not a cop-out, just a fact. It's the same old problem when these nominations come up - our side follows the spirit of the original rules that says unless the person is clearly unqualified, corrupt, etc... the President gets to choose. When its our turn, the other side ignores the rules and Borks us - and our leadership lets it happen. I totally understand and share the frustration. The next time it's our turn we need to a) pick someone young with Scalia-level cred - no more Souters and b) jam our nominee down the Senate's throat with equal gusto. Short of pointing out her support of judicial activism (which merely puts her in line with the majority of justices since the 50's), lack of experience on the bench and the Harvard recruitment/DADT flaps, there's nothing to go to war over. And if we do, we hand Bambi an issue to flak us on. Take back the Court by taking back the Presidency. Until then, we have to live with this one.

87

Sodomite still does not apply to homosexual women BTW.

Tell that to Princess Donna and Celia Vega [sorry, no hot links - you'll have to google it for yourself].

And I will re-iterate one more time: Sodomites are bad, BAD news.

They are not normal people.

They are not interested in life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

They are not interested in truth, justice, and the American way.

There is always an ulterior motive with a sodomite [just as there is always an ulterior motive with a Jew, or, as in this case, a Jewess] - some hidden agenda, some cabalistic conspiracy.

Always.

They are never what they appear to be.

You cede authority to your society over to them at your peril.

 

88

With Sotomayor, it was *all* about the personal story. Sotomayor's sole qualification was that she was a "wise Latina woman" capable of empathy. That's the ludicrous bar by which she made it to the bench, making a mockery of Constitutional jurisprudence.

Okay, then if that's the measure, now let's hear all about Kagan's personal story. Why not, there's nothing else to recommend her, and as of Sotomayor it's not out of bounds. As someone said, your given baliff has more court experience than this broad. How exactly is she "supremely qualified"? She went to Harvard and then all the right cocktail parties? 

89 As I said in an earlier thread. We should fight every nomination tooth and nail. We should drag out lying character witnesses who testify to all kinds of bad shit with  no evidence.

At the end we should say, pay back is a MF so how do you like them apples.

If we win good, if we don't still good. At least we will not be unilaterally surrendering in a war of the nominations.

There is a reason half of the R nominees are liberals and none of the Dems ever are conservative.

 

90 The overwhelming consensus of this thread, sans a troll, is that the morons don't care whom she diddles. (Besides, a lot of us have a deep affection for for lz pr0n). Furthermore we have concluded that she's one of the most dudely and homely looking gals we've seen. Some pretty good japes have been made about that. More to the point we have also concluded: She has a deep, abiding contempt for the Constitution. That's the part we care about.

91 The reason half the R nominees are liberals is that a Republican president picked the wrong people half the time. Scalia hasn't shown any tilt to the left despite years on the Court. Nor has Thomas. Rehnquist didn't. O'Connor and Souter were bad picks our Presidents should have seen coming (both were ideologically hazy wafflers) - and the ABA still had its hand in the process back then. If we stick with judges who have a proven track record of strong originalism and judicial restraint, we avoid that problem 9 out of 10 times.

92 It doesn't matter if she is Gay.  But any close relationships she may have do matter.  If other nominees can be questioned about their husbands or wives than a Gay person can be questioned about her/his partner.  That's why Kagan's silence is suspicious.  It isn't whether she is Gay but is she hiding some personal acquaintences she knows would be a problem...lobbyist, etc.  And anyway, why not just come out and say yes or no?

93

Well, I wasn't either, NTTAWWT.

I caught it from a toilet seat.

94

Who gives flying frisbee what this woman does in her bedroom?  As long as she and her partner--man, woman, electric dildo etc--don't do it in the street, who cares?

And yes she has been triple whupped with the ugly stick; short, chubby and homely is no way to go through life.

And yes she got her lunch handed to her in oral argument before the Supreme Court .

But considering what the Narcissist in Chief might have done; Hillary a Supreme Court Justice--well all I can say about this pick is the old Merle Haggard tune--"It ain't love, but it ain't bad".

95 But considering what the Narcissist in Chief might have done; Hillary a Supreme Court Justice--well all I can say about this pick is the old Merle Haggard tune--"It ain't love, but it ain't bad".

I disagree.  Hillary's older, stupider and more easily distracted.  I would love to have Hillary on SCOTUS.  The only one better -- Janet Reno.

96 I agree that this shouldn't be an issue, but for some reason it is. And if she isn't gay, then it would really make more sense for her to just say that publicly, especially if she still wants all the hot DC guys to think she's available.

And no, lesbians are about the only ones who can't have sodomy. Straights, however, can, so don't be a hypocrite. Start worrying about all the straights on the court and whether or not they're doing kinky stuff in the bedroom if it's so important.

But it's really a stupid point. Either she can read and interpret the law, or she can't. Even if you believe homosexuality is a sin, biblically it's no worse than any other sin, so it's just ignorant to treat gays as something less than based on that alone, especially in a post that mentions Spitzer.

97

Even if you believe homosexuality is a sin, biblically it's no worse than any other sin, so it's just ignorant to treat gays as something less than based on that alone, especially in a post that mentions Spitzer.

No, it doesn't have anything to do with ignorance.

In fact, to the contrary, it's the height of IGNORANCE to stick your head in the sand and pretend that there isn't something seriously [really deadly] wrong with hedonistic nihilism of homosexuality.

A nation run by homosexuals is a nation doomed to extinction.

Period.

No ifs, ands, or buts about it.

If you neo-cons are happy with the prospect of extinction, then go jump off a cliff.

Just don't ask the rest of us to jump with you.

 

 

98 Oh noes!  The anonymous prick called us NEO-CONS!!!!  Whatever shall we do?

99 Queer or not, she's so fuggin' ugly she ain't even a double bagger!

100 I thought a funny bit in Highlander was when the Kagan got into the old folks' car and looked at the lady in the passenger seat and goes, "Mom!"  That might have been the nun, but it was still funny.

She looks shorter than I remember, but maybe she used a half apple for the movie.

101 Is this Stormfront refugee for real?

102 So, when's that lacey wigs guy gonna show up? That might make a difference to this thread. As for Kagan herself, pontificators make lousy judges. Always too busy talking to listen. Let's see how long she spends saying nothing, and then we'll know.

103

Out here in flyover country [amongst normal people, who are still sane, and who know the difference between right and wrong], when someone points out the grossly simplistic tautology that a nation - which is governed by the aggressive expansionism of the hedonistic nihilism of homosexuality - is a nation which is doomed to extinction, folks don't usually respond with slurs like "stormfront".

But, like I say, when you Neo-cons all join hands and jump off the cliff together, please don't expect us stormfront paratroopers to jump off with you - at that point, we will have far too many champagne corks which will need to be popped in celebration of your passing.

 

104 folks don't usually respond with slurs like "stormfront".

Actually, that was for:

There is always an ulterior motive with a sodomite [just as there is always an ulterior motive with a Jew, or, as in this case, a Jewess] - some hidden agenda, some cabalistic conspiracy.   Always.

You may now return to sucking Goebbels decaying cock, untermensch.

105 Elena Kagan is in a committed relationship with two gentlemen, Ben & Jerry. 

106 Hey, ugly fat Jew girls need love.

She just didn't have the internet to connect to a fat Jew boy.

Remember, Joos are the worst at dating.  They are racist, that is only another Jew will do. Jew guys will screw gentile girls all day,  but not Jew girls.  They marry the Jew girls, they fuck the gentiles.

107

But, like I say, when you Neo-cons all join hands and jump off the cliff together, please don't expect us stormfront paratroopers to jump off with you - at that point, we will have far too many champagne corks which will need to be popped in celebration of your passing.

 Posted by: Lindsey Grahamnesty licking Rahm Emanuel's sweet, hairy balls at May 12, 2010 02:26 PM (J+UTa)

Didn't Hitler and the National Socialists passing happen already?  As I remember a lot of champagne corks were popped.  The Nazi moment passed and will not return.