2005: KAGAN GUSHES OVER OBAMA

From Verum Serum:



More at Verum Serum.

Clearly, Kagan is a member of the Cult of Obama. So this fits too:

ANOTHER U.S. SUPREME COURT JUSTICE TO RETIRE?

From this article in the Washington Post on September 3, 2009:

Justice John Paul Stevens has hired only one clerk for the Supreme Court term that begins in October 2010, and in the tea-leaf-reading world of the court, that is being taken as a sign he is considering retirement.

Active justices generally have four clerks, and Stevens, 89, has hired that many for the court's new term, which begins next month. Stevens usually hires all of his clerks at the same time, and well in advance of the term in which they will work.

So his decision to make one hire thus far for the 2010-2011 term -- retired justices are entitled to one clerk -- seems significant....

Wiki has some information on his judicial philosophy. He is mostly on the liberal side of the court and wrote SCOTUS decisions less conservative than those written when he served on the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals.

Reminder: the Presidential power of appointments to the United States Supreme Court extends that President's power well beyond the term limits in the Oval Office.

CHUCK SCHUMER TARGETS THE SUPREME COURT

New York Senator Chuck Schumer is one of the MOST repugnant members of the United States Senate. He is, in fact, an Authoritarian, if not a Stalinist. He would be very happy if we had a form of government where we could get rid of elections and the people are governed by a ruling elite...the kind of government Plato and Marx wrote about.

Schumer is angry that the new conservative members of the Supreme Court have made some decisions that have gone against precedent. In fact, one of the court's liberal members, Stephen Breyer, is actually lobbying members of Congress to look at the recent decisions. Naturally, he was able to persuade the Senate's biggest eunuch, Arlen Specter; [see LMC's post.]

Breyer has publicly raised concerns that conservative justices were violating stare decisis, the legal doctrine that, for the sake of stability, courts should generally leave precedents undisturbed.

"It is not often in the law that so few have so quickly changed so much," Breyer said, reading his dissent from the bench in June to a 5-4 ruling that overturned school desegregation policies in two cities.

Okay, so the court shouldn't ever go against precedent. What is established now is absolutely, Constitutionally correct and not even debatable. What is this, Global Warming?

I'd like to ask Justice Breyer if how he feels about the precedent of the Dred Scott decision. "Oh well, that's was an obvious mistake," he'll say. So what? It's precedent, isn't it?

Anyway, back to the point at hand. Chuck Schumer has declared that Bush will not be allowed to put another conservative on the Supreme Court. Well, democracy was fun while it lasted, wasn't it?

There's another story out today about how Daily Kos and Moveon.org are going to start targeting advertisers on Fox News. Their argument:

"We're not trying to silence anybody," Green said. "Rush Limbaugh has a right to be on the air—he admits his point of view. Fox doesn't."

I'm making a similar call to the Democrat Party. Admit who you really are.

Relipaundit adds: Great post! I just love how the Lefties say the Constitution is written in stone when it comes to decisions it LIKES (like Roe v Wade - which BTW is based on entirely vestigial science!), but when it comes to things they don't like, then their favorite refrain is, "IT'S A LIVING CONSTITUTION!"

The Democrats have become complete freakin' hypocrites. They have NO PRINCIPLES, only demagoguery and fear-mongering and class-warfare.

That's who I think they are at least - and was raised by Democrats, and first registered as a Dem in 1974 - AND I LIVE AMONG THEM IN NYC! So I know of what and whom I speak!

I voted Bush in 2004, and will probably never ever vote Dem again. This post explains another reason why.

GOVERNMENT MUST DEAL WITH GREENHOUSE GASES: U.S. SUPREME COURT

I didn't have to read further than the headline to know that the vote was 5-4. No bonus points if you can guess which judges were on which side.

This is bad, bad news. This decision, Massachusetts v. EPA, will no doubt become the Global Warming version of Roe v. Wade.

G-d help us.