GOP struggles for line of attack ahead of Kagan hearings
Republican criticism of Supreme Court nominee finds little traction

Senate starts Kagan confirmation hearings .
.by Anne E. Kornblut and Paul Kane

updated 6/28/2010 3:04:22 AM ET

For weeks leading up to the start of Elena Kagan's Senate confirmation hearings Monday, Republicans have struggled to find a compelling line of attack to take against the Supreme Court nominee. But their efforts to wield an effective cudgel against President Obama's second nomination to the country's highest court have largely failed.

In a month of oil spills and Afghan tumult, the Kagan nomination is one effort that has gone seamlessly for the White House. In part, participants say, that is precisely because it has been overshadowed by a flood of other events that have consumed Congress and kept Republicans from mounting a more muscular front against her.

But it is also a measure of how skilled operatives have become at managing the process — and choosing nominees who are notable in part for their political blandness.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37967924/ns/politics/

Ignore the lying leftist author of this piece. The fact is the Clinton Library has been withholding all the important Elena Kagan data and refusing to release it until just 20 days before her hearings. The lying leftists at the Clinton library released only one third Kagan of the data on June 4. The left are deliberately trying to block the american peoples' access to data on that radical leftist. For this author to now right a piece about republicans not finding a compelling line of attack when the republicans have only received one third of the material on this hag shows just how subhuman and desparate the lefties are...get the facts:

http://legaltimes.typepad.com/blt/2010/06/...an-records.html

The Washington Post is the paper people trust in Washington, D.C.

Now, can you discuss this nomination honestly, or not?

First, The Washington Post is a lib-leftist rag on the order of the New York Times. Secondly, I have read the washington post for more than 40 years so I don't need a lesson about their politics. Third, I've worked in Wasington DC for more than 40 years and would be more than glad to discuss any aspect of the lying leftist mainstream media with you. (ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, CNN, Washington Post, New York Times, LA Times, Miami Herald, Atlanta Journal and Constitution and all the the other leftist rags that pass for news today.)

Finally, I DOUCMENTED MY POINT!! The Clinton library has deliberately withheld all the Elean Kagan papers from review until the last minute...just released only 1/3 of their papers on her June 4!! Wanna debate any of these facts????? Your idiot leftist author just happened to leave out this very important fact in his BS piece about the GOP not having a plan of attack...GOP HAS TO FIRST GET THE DATA ON KAGAN AND THE CLINTON LIBRARY WILL NOT RELEASE IT.

Once again, we see the Post lie by omission!!

Bring it on!

Can you discuss the fact that the GOP cannot find a way to attack Elena Kagan's nomination, or can you not?

I already did that! What part of having no data on Kagan don't you get???????????? What part of not being able to get the Kagan background data from the Clinton libarary can't you fathom. How old are you??? Do you even have a college education? Name one mondern supreme court nominee where the background data on that nominee was kept from congress??? You can't plan an attack on a supreme court nonimee WITHOUT BACKGROUND DATA, idiot!! Kagan also has never served as a judge or written an opinion so the only background data on that hag is being held by the Clinton library which has only released one third of the data.

What part of this don't you get! There is nothing to attack until her background data is released! Do you need a picture drawn???????????? Get you mother to help you with this very simple truth. We know she is a racist and has been overruled on at least one decision as a result. We know she is a hypocrite who, while kicking the ROTC off the Harvard campus for their stance against homosexuals TOOK $100 million from the Saudis who kill homosexuals on sight.

Why don't you come to the debate with your links to all of your facts, and leave the insults off of the forum.

You do know how to debate, don't you?

Why don't you debate the fact that the GOP is having difficulty in replying to her nomination?

I guess it's difficult when she has this kind of support;

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0610/38853.html

I already did that in that post # 2 with my link to the "legal times" but your 5th grade reading skill set has gotten in the way. You question asking why the GOP hasn't honed a plan of attack has been answered in spades and only a simpleton would not see that. Let me ask you...if you had to study for exam where youi only had access to 33% of the data you needed, what the hell would you do??? That is exactly what has happened to the GOP because of the lying leftist(Clinton Library) deliberately withholding 66% of the Elena Kagan records.

Another link to for you posted in text form from your your precious Huffington site:


"Sessions: No Kagan Hearings Without Clinton Files
JULIE HIRSCHFELD DAVIS | 05/24/10 05:33 PM |

Share Comments 523 WASHINGTON — The top Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee warned Monday that he would seek to slow Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan's path to confirmation unless senators get full access to her files as a Clinton administration aide.

"We're heading to what could be a train wreck," Sen. Jeff Sessions of Alabama said. "I don't believe that this committee can go forward with an adequate hearing" without all records from Kagan's tenure as a White House counsel and then domestic policy adviser to President Bill Clinton.

Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., the Judiciary Committee chairman, last week set hearings to begin on June 28. Sessions said Republicans would ask for a delay unless senators get access to the tens of thousands of pages of Clinton-era records by then.

Sessions doesn't have a veto over the hearing schedule, but his threat set the stage for a potential partisan showdown over the documents and the pace of Kagan's confirmation process.

Kagan, 50, is President Barack Obama's choice to succeed retiring Justice John Paul Stevens. Obama named her two weeks ago and asked that the Senate confirm her in time for her to join the court at the start of its new session this fall. Leahy's hearing date would meet that timetable, paving the way for a vote in the full Senate before its monthlong August vacation.

The nation's archivist told Leahy and Sessions in a letter last week that his staff would begin releasing the documents, which are held at the William J. Clinton Presidential Library in Little Rock, Ark., by June 4 and try to accommodate the panel's June 28 deadline.

Obama has said he won't seek to block release of the documents by claiming executive privilege. It's not clear whether Clinton will do so.

Kagan, who has stepped aside from her post as solicitor general to focus on her confirmation, has never been a judge and has little courtroom experience. Republicans and some Democrats are eager to examine the Clinton administration files for clues about her views and what kind of a justice she might be.

On Monday, Sessions suggested another aspect of Kagan's past – her decision as dean of Harvard Law School to bar military recruiters from campus in protest of the ban on openly gay soldiers – was an essential factor for senators contemplating whether to support her."


DO LET ME KNOW WHAT PART YOU DON'T GET?????????????

P.S...almost forgot...AP coverage of the GOP being denied Kagan background info...do let's debate this point as it relates to your stupid question:

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/politics...k-94805699.html

Translation; They are stalling, and seeking to stall her confirmation.

The GOP just doesn't have any game!

Translation...you've been mauled on your own topic and once again we see the leftie trying to undermind the peoples' right to know.

You've never been involved in formal debating before, have you?

You poor sap...you're trying to hid the azz whuppin' I've put on you by changing the subject. Gee, folks, who do we know that does this??? I've debated formally and on crap sites like this one. Unlike you, I brought actualy counterveiling facts and backed them up with general knowledge. All you can do is holler about thread integrity or can I debate, ha,ha,ha,ha.


Is there anyone where with at least a 10th grade reading skill set and a couple of years of college and some basic knowledge of this country??? Unfortunately, this one doesn't possess any of those attributes.

You still can't debate this thread, can you?

I already have and you lost! Here is the linked data that just tore you a new one on this issue! It clearly shows you to be a fool for even asking such a question...you lost because you question is ridiculous before the facts. How utterly stupid can you be:



"Another link to for you posted in text form from your your precious Huffington site:


"Sessions: No Kagan Hearings Without Clinton Files
JULIE HIRSCHFELD DAVIS | 05/24/10 05:33 PM |

Share Comments 523 WASHINGTON — The top Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee warned Monday that he would seek to slow Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan's path to confirmation unless senators get full access to her files as a Clinton administration aide.

"We're heading to what could be a train wreck," Sen. Jeff Sessions of Alabama said. "I don't believe that this committee can go forward with an adequate hearing" without all records from Kagan's tenure as a White House counsel and then domestic policy adviser to President Bill Clinton.

Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., the Judiciary Committee chairman, last week set hearings to begin on June 28. Sessions said Republicans would ask for a delay unless senators get access to the tens of thousands of pages of Clinton-era records by then.

Sessions doesn't have a veto over the hearing schedule, but his threat set the stage for a potential partisan showdown over the documents and the pace of Kagan's confirmation process.

Kagan, 50, is President Barack Obama's choice to succeed retiring Justice John Paul Stevens. Obama named her two weeks ago and asked that the Senate confirm her in time for her to join the court at the start of its new session this fall. Leahy's hearing date would meet that timetable, paving the way for a vote in the full Senate before its monthlong August vacation.

The nation's archivist told Leahy and Sessions in a letter last week that his staff would begin releasing the documents, which are held at the William J. Clinton Presidential Library in Little Rock, Ark., by June 4 and try to accommodate the panel's June 28 deadline.

Obama has said he won't seek to block release of the documents by claiming executive privilege. It's not clear whether Clinton will do so.

Kagan, who has stepped aside from her post as solicitor general to focus on her confirmation, has never been a judge and has little courtroom experience. Republicans and some Democrats are eager to examine the Clinton administration files for clues about her views and what kind of a justice she might be.

On Monday, Sessions suggested another aspect of Kagan's past – her decision as dean of Harvard Law School to bar military recruiters from campus in protest of the ban on openly gay soldiers – was an essential factor for senators contemplating whether to support her."


DO LET ME KNOW WHAT PART YOU DON'T GET?????????????

P.S...almost forgot...AP coverage of the GOP being denied Kagan background info...do let's debate this point as it relates to your stupid question:

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/politics...k-94805699.html

All I got from your link was an "Error 404"

LOL! They are still hoping to drag their heels on this nomination because she has a stellar legal background.
Even former solicitor generals, from both sides of the aisle, have praised her and see her as a good choice for the Court.

Hi Sherri ...... how ya been?

? ? ? ?

If you are new here, I have no idea who you are.

Do you care to discuss Elena Kagan, or not?

You're a liar! She has NO background because, as the links document, no one can get access to her background. You think the Clinton library is withholding 66% of her background records because she has a stellar background???

This from the link you claim you can't get:


"GOP senator: push for quick Kagan hearings could cause a 'train wreck'
By: JULIE HIRSCHFELD DAVIS
Associated Press
05/25/10 12:02 PM EDT

WASHINGTON — The top Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee warned Monday that he would seek to slow Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan's path to confirmation unless senators get full access to her files as a Clinton administration aide.

"We're heading to what could be a train wreck," Sen. Jeff Sessions of Alabama said. "I don't believe that this committee can go forward with an adequate hearing" without all records from Kagan's tenure as a White House counsel and then domestic policy adviser to President Bill Clinton.

Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., the Judiciary Committee chairman, last week set hearings to begin on June 28. Sessions said Republicans would ask for a delay unless senators get access to the tens of thousands of pages of Clinton-era records by then.

Sessions doesn't have a veto over the hearing schedule, but his threat set the stage for a potential partisan showdown over the documents and the pace of Kagan's confirmation process.

Kagan, 50, is President Barack Obama's choice to succeed retiring Justice John Paul Stevens. Obama named her two weeks ago and asked that the Senate confirm her in time for her to join the court at the start of its new session this fall. Leahy's hearing date would meet that timetable, paving the way for a vote in the full Senate before its monthlong August vacation.

The nation's archivist told Leahy and Sessions in a letter last week that his staff would begin releasing the documents, which are held at the William J. Clinton Presidential Library in Little Rock, Ark., by June 4 and try to accommodate the panel's June 28 deadline.

Obama has said he won't seek to block release of the documents by claiming executive privilege. It's not clear whether Clinton will do so.

Kagan, who has stepped aside from her post as solicitor general to focus on her confirmation, has never been a judge and has little courtroom experience. Republicans and some Democrats are eager to examine the Clinton administration files for clues about her views and what kind of a justice she might be.

On Monday, Sessions suggested another aspect of Kagan's past — her decision as dean of Harvard Law School to bar military recruiters from campus in protest of the ban on openly gay soldiers — was an essential factor for senators contemplating whether to support her.

Sessions called the decision "wrong," and "not lawful."

It's not that simple. Kagan's move defied a statute denying federal funding to schools that barred military recruiters — after an appeals court ruled that the law was likely unconstitutional. But that law, known as the Solomon amendment, remained in force at the time while it awaited review by the Supreme Court.

She reversed course when faced with the threat of losing the federal money.

"This matter does raise questions of whether Dean Kagan would be able to serve all Americans as a responsible, impartial jurist, or whether she would bring her ideological agenda to the bench and attempt to get around the Constitution and the laws of the United States to effectuate what she thinks might be a better policy," Sessions said.

Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/politics...l#ixzz0sBQXfPnH


WHERE'S YOUR DATA SHOWING THAT THE LYING LEFT HAS RELEASED ALL HER BACKGROUND RECORDS?????????????

It is still a stall, if it wasn't that, it wouldn't have come from the office of the Ranking member on the committee. It would have come from both the Chair of the committee and the Ranking member.

Well, you're just as friendly as always.

You lefties are so full of anger, it must to live like that.



not with you.

Aren't you here, to debate the politics of the day?

yes

Well, why don't you show me what you've got?

Answer: because you have a reputation for being a spamming troll - never answering questions, dodging the topic, derailing the debate, etc.

You did it at OTL --- have you improved your debate?

I don't know what you are talking about, but I'm the only person trying to keep this thread on topic.

You might think that is funny, but it definitely shows that you are not in possession of the facts.

Stop derailing the thread. Get back on topic please.

Thread Topic; Replying to GOP Struggles to Find a Line of Attack

Yes...it is a stall as the facts show! It is a stall by the Clinto Library which houses virtually all the kagan background papers. That you are denying these well-documented facts makes you nothing more than a liar...

What is the Clinto Library?

I assume the owner of this site will toss you for spaming threads! You posts have no value other than to spam this site.

This is the second time you are cutting and pasting. You're right, you had best be a little concerned.

Take a hike moron! You've been reduced to a thread spammer as everyone can see! You best effort now is one-liner nonsense because the FACTS have whipped your butt and you have nothing.

The owner of this site should toss your troll azz out of here.

Just who do you think you are, when you think you can tell me what to do?

I think the owner of this forum is happy I'm here, because the forum has picked up traffic.

I think he's very glad that I'm here................

I brought the traffic UP before you got here with your spam posts...

Do you really want to make the claim that a moderator here is spamming the forum?

I suggest you get back on track with this thread, and try not to make false claims that you know are untrue.

And the troll is still here, and my mother didn't think I'd be home early.

DL, what has Sherri posted that constitutes spam? Oh, wait, you can't see this forum anymore because your stalker-boy ass just got confined to Reform School. Keep it up, laughing boy, and you'll find the rest of what passes for your stay here quite unpleasant.