Tag Archives: Nomination

Obama’s Supreme Court nominee gave money to pro-abortion group

From Life Site News.

Excerpt:

…Kagan has revealed her pro-abortion loyalties by contributing financially to the pro-abortion National Partnership for Women and Families (NPWF), reported Americans United for Life Wednesday.

NPWF, according to its own website, works “to increase women’s access to quality, confidential reproductive health services and block attempts to limit reproductive rights and reverse hard-won gains.” The organization goes on to specify “contraceptive services and supplies, sexuality education, [and] abortion services” as among its top concerns.

In addition, wrote AUL, NPWF senior advisor Judith Lichtman “wholeheartedly” supported Kagan’s nomination in a letter, saying the Solicitor General was a “friend and colleague.” Lichtman, a radical supporter of abortion, has said that “efforts to limit coverage of abortion services are really attempts to deny women access to health care services,” according to AUL.

NPWF has deep connections among the most powerful pro-abortion lobby groups in the country: NPWF President Debra L. Ness serves on the Board of Directors at Emily’s List, a group dedicated to helping pro-abortion female politicians win elections, and once worked as deputy director of NARAL. NPWF Board Chairwoman Ellen Malcolm was the founder of Emily’s List.

Obama is the most pro-abortion president we’ve ever had. So it makes sense that he would nominate a radical pro-abortion candidate.

Democrats are the party of abortion. If you don’t like abortion, don’t vote for Democrats.

But is she a socialist, too?

Erick Erickson of Red State has a PDF of her college thesis on socialism. (H/T Hot Air)

Excerpt:

This proves Elena Kagan is an open and avowed socialist. The woman declares that socialists must stick together instead of fracture in order to advance a socialist agenda, which Kagan advocates.

Obama the tax and spend socialist picked a socialist to be his nominee to the Supreme Court. Makes sense.

Obama’s pick to replace Justice Stevens is pro-abortion

Story here from Life Site News.

Excerpt:

Top White House aides expect President Obama to select Solicitor General Elena Kagan on Monday as the Supreme Court justice to replace retiring Justice John Paul Stevens, reports Mike Allen of Politico Friday.

[…]Kagan is known for strongly favoring taxpayer funded abortion, and is a critic of the 1991 Supreme Court decision Rust v. Sullivan, which upheld federal regulations prohibiting Title X family planning fund recipients from counseling on or referring for abortion.

Americans United for Life also reports that Kagan once suggested that faith-based groups operating pregnancy care centers should not counsel pregnant youths, for fear that they would include their religious beliefs in the counseling process.

In April, the White House reacted with fury when Ben Domenech, writing in a blog post for CBS News, declared that Kagan would be the “first openly gay justice” on the U.S. Supreme Court. Under increasing pressure from the Obama administration, CBS eventually pulled the post and Domenech apologized for “a Harvard rumor” – but not before posting an addendum stating: “I have to correct my text here to say that Kagan is apparently still closeted – odd, because her female partner is rather well known in Harvard circles.”

UPDATE: CNS News has more here.

Excerpt:

U.S. Solicitor General Elena Kagan will face two major stumbling blocks as a Supreme Court nominee – her anti-military views and her ties to Goldman Sachs, a conservative group says.

“Conservatives know Kagan as the Harvard Law School Dean who tried to bar the military from college campuses, an issue she fought all the way to the Supreme Court,” the Family Research Council said on Friday in an email to supporters.

“At the time, even Ruth Bader Ginsberg, one of the court’s most liberal justices, couldn’t find a way to justify Kagan’s position.” The FRC described Kagan’s “incredibly hostile view of the military” as “well outside the American mainstream.”

The group also criticized Kagan’s strong support for “hate crimes” laws. And it notes that she has no judicial experience, never having litigated a case to verdict or trial.

Kagan served on a Goldman Sachs advisory council several years ago, receiving a $10,000 stipend for her work.

[…]Americans United for Life describes Kagan as an “ardent abortion supporter.”

“Elena Kagan has strong ties to abortion-advocacy organizations and expressed admiration for activist judges who have worked to advance social policy rather than to impartially interpret the law,” said AUL CEO and President Dr. Charmaine Yoest.

[…]The Human Rights Campaign, a homosexual advocacy group, said it is confident that Kagan has “a demonstrated understanding and commitment to protecting the liberty and equality of all Americans, including LGBT Americans.”

She is a radical, radical leftist.

Who would the Wintery Knight nominate to the Supreme Court?

If we had elected McCain instead, then he might have appointed my favorite judge, Edith H. Jones or my other favorite judge, Janice Rogers Brown.

Read about them:

Janice Rogers Brown

Judge Janice Rogers Brown is the first black woman to serve on California’s Supreme Court. Her nomination to a federal appeals court has been blocked by Senate Democrats.

In 1997, she issued a well-researched dissent in a case where the California Supreme Court overturned a pro-life law requiring abortion facilities to obtain parental consent before performing an abortion on a teenage girl.

Brown accused the court’s plurality of abrogating the constitutional rights of parents, described the court’s thinking as circular, and called the case “an excellent example of the folly of courts in the role of philosopher kings.”

“When fundamentally moral and philosophical issues are involved and the questions are fairly debatable,” Brown wrote, “the judgment call belongs to the Legislature. They represent the will of the people.”

She also dissented in a decision requiring Catholic Charities to pay for contraception coverage in employee health insurance plans. The decision concerns pro-life groups because it could lead to a requirement that abortion be covered as well.

Brown has also garnered the support of the California voters. In 1998, 76% of voters decided to keep Brown on the bench in their state, the highest percentage of supporting votes in that election.

Edith Jones

Judge Edith Jones of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals is frequently mentioned as a contender for the high court. She was considered for the Supreme Court seat that eventually went to Clarence Thomas.

If pro-life advocates are looking for a justice who strongly opposes Roe v. Wade, Jones should be a favorite.

When the 5th Circuit denied a request in October by Norma McCorvey to approve her motion to overturn the Roe v. Wade ruling, Judge Jones issued an opinion blasting the Supreme Court’s opinion in Roe and saying it needs to be re-examined.

She called Roe an “exercise of raw judicial power,” and cited evidence McCorvey presented showing abortions hurt women.

Jones, a Reagan nominee, wrote that the “[Supreme] Court’s rulings have rendered basic abortion policy beyond the power of our legislative bodies.”

“The perverse result of the Court’s having determined through constitutional adjudication this fundamental social policy, which affects over a million women and unborn babies each year, is that the facts no longer matter,” Jones added.

Jones chided the nation’s high court for being “so committed to ‘life’ that it struggles with the particular facts of dozens of death penalty cases each year,” but failing to grasp the fact that abortions destroys the lives of unborn children.

“One may fervently hope that the court will someday acknowledge such developments and re-evaluate Roe and Casey accordingly,” Jones said of the 5000 pages of evidence with affidavits from over 1000 woman who have been harmed by abortion.

These are the two best picks for supreme court, if we are going for raw talent. And it’s a tragedy that they are both not on the Supreme Court right now. A tragedy!

Obama’s TSA nominee withdraws after lying to Congress about abuse of power

Story from Yahoo News.  (H/T Ed Morissey of Hot Air)

Excerpt:

The Obama administration’s choice to lead the Transportation Security Administration withdrew his name Wednesday.

In a statement, Erroll Southers said he was pulling out because his nomination had become a lightning rod for those with a political agenda. President Barack Obama tapped Southers, a former FBI agent, to lead the TSA in September but his confirmation has been blocked by Republican Sen. Jim DeMint, who says he was worried Southers would allow TSA employees to engage in collective bargaining with the government.

Questions have also been raised about a reprimand that Southers received for running background checks on his then-estranged wife’s boyfriend two decades ago. Southers wrote a letter to lawmakers earlier this month acknowledging that he had given inconsistent answers to Congress on that issue.

Ed Morrissey writes:

There were at least three reasons why Southers’ nomination was going nowhere in the Senate.  When Congress created TSA and the Department of Homeland Security, it exempted both from labor laws that allowed unions to organize the workers, in order to avoid having labor problems disrupt national-security efforts.  Southers was seen as an appointee who would push for unionization by Senator Jim DeMint, among others, who held the nomination in order to get clearer answers from the Obama administration on their intentions.  That hold got lifted shortly after the Christmas Day bombing when the Obama administration complained that the Senate had prevented Obama from providing leadership to TSA, but Obama had taken eight months to nominate Southers in the first place.

It was at that time that Southers finally admitted that he had misled Congress during his confirmation process on his involvement in breaching privacy laws to investigate his wife’s boyfriend.  That involved two issues of trust: accountability to Congress and the security of private information being held by the government.  Not only did Southers himself twice breach the data, he also disseminated it — which is a felony, although long past the statute of limitations, presumably.  The Senate should not look kindly on appointees who begin their jobs by lying to Congress, and multiple holds replaced the DeMint hold as a result.  That has nothing to do with “political agendas,” but with Southers’ suitability for the job.

Another one bites the dust. Here’s a few of the previous failures.

Who did Obama pick to handle the re-organization of General Motors?

Look!Obama is appointing the best and the brightest person possible to oversee the bankruptcy re-organization of GM!

First, you need to know about Obama’s take-over of GM, which is pure communism.

Here’s the story from CNSNews:

Without the prior approval of Congress or any legislation authorizing the act, President Obama plans to announce on Monday that the federal government will take a 60-percent ownership stake in General Motors as part of a bankruptcy and reorganization plan for the company.

The White House on Sunday night announced that the plan will require the federal government to provide another $30 billion of taxpayer money to General Motors, on top of the $20 billion in aid the federal government already has given the company.

And guess who Obama’s picked to supervise the bankruptcy and reorganization?

Here’s the left-wing New York Times article: (H/T Hot Air)

It is not every 31-year-old who, in a first government job, finds himself dismantling General Motors and rewriting the rules of American capitalism.

But that, in short, is the job description for Brian Deese, a not-quite graduate of Yale Law School who had never set foot in an automotive assembly plant until he took on his nearly unseen role in remaking the American automotive industry.

Nor, for that matter, had he given much thought to what ailed an industry that had been in decline ever since he was born. A bit laconic and looking every bit the just-out-of-graduate-school student adjusting to life in the West Wing — “he’s got this beard that appears and disappears,” says Steven Rattner, one of the leaders of President Obama’s automotive task force — Mr. Deese was thrown into the auto industry’s maelstrom as soon the election-night parties ended.

“There was a time between Nov. 4 and mid-February when I was the only full-time member of the auto task force,” Mr. Deese, a special assistant to the president for economic policy, acknowledged recently as he hurried between his desk at the White House and the Treasury building next door. “It was a little scary.”

Ed Morrissey comments:

Scary?  Well, yes, and not just for Mr. Deese, whose executive experience actually is less than Obama’s.  He’s never run any business, let alone worked in the auto industry.  He joined the Hillary Clinton campaign by taking a hiatus from law school, which he began after working as an assistant to Gene Sperling, now an advisor to Tim Geithner.  His entire resume consists of campaign work.

Perhaps Deese will do a good job, but I’m not terribly sanguine about the prospects of GM prospering under the guidance of someone who hasn’t ever met a payroll or sold a car.  A President who took his own job seriously would never have appointed a second-tier adviser to this position. A national media who took their jobs seriously wouldn’t let him get away with it, and don’t count this NYT piece in their favor.  They give a glowing report to this political-hackery appointment.

Heck of a job, Deesie!

Nice Deb has reactions from around the blogosphere here. Here’s one from the Heritage Foundation:

Will the new majority owner of General Motors — the United States Government — take an active role in managing the firm as it struggles for viability? In a statement earlier today, President Obama insisted that the government wouldn’t impose it’s own political agenda on GM.

“What we are not doing, what I have no interest in doing, is running GM,” he declared. Calling the government a “reluctant shareholder”, he declared that “GM will be run by a private board of directors and management team with a track record in American manufacturing that reflects a commitment to innovation and quality…They and not the government will call the shots and make the decisions about how to turn this company around… When a difficult decision has to be made like where to open a new plant or what type of new car to make, the new GM, not the US government will make that decision”.

This sounds reassuring, but in fact this non-interference pledge was broken even before he started speaking, as the White House was already trumpeting a pledge extracted from GM to “build a new small car in an idled UAW factory”, furthering the President’s environmental goals as well as pleasing his labor allies.

I think a law student/Hillary campaign lackey is the best candidate available. He’s a Democrat, at least, so you know you’re getting superior economic reasoning power. And GM just asked for another 30 billion, presumably to pay for their union member pensions and benefits. What do you expect when the President and Democrat Congress are running trillion-dollar deficits?

His Supreme Court nominee has similar qualifications. She’s Hispanic and female – female and Hispanic. And she thinks her sex and race will make her a better judge than white male candidates. The best and brightest!