This women is evil.

This women is evil.

From the way Kagan dodged and evaded questions from Republican Senators one would think that some abortionist sucked her brains out! I agree with Kaye, this is an evil woman,a way left of center woman who does not belong on the Supreme Court.

yeah, why leave decisions like these to doctors and patients? Better that we let the SCOTUS and congress make these decisions.

They say "Don't judge a book by its cover", yet it appears these confirmation hearings are simply an opportunity to provide these nominees a "cover" for their true beliefs, ideology, and character. They will say anything to assuage concern that they may not in fact use their office to further undermine the U.S. Constitution and make law by Judicial Diktat. They lie... and quite openly if one just takes the time to open the book of their lives and read the pages. Once they get past the confirmation process THEY WILL do as they please.

Case in point - a certain "wise latina woman" in her confirmation hearing for Justice of the Supreme Court:

Senator Patrick Leahy; "Is it safe to say you accept the Second Amendment is an individual right?"

Sonia Sotomayor; "Yes sir. I understand how important the right to keep and bear arms is to many people. One of my godchildren is a member of the NRA."

Yet... when we fast forward to just this last week, we find Sotomayor one of the dissenting votes in McDonald vs. City of Chicago, wherein she writes; "the Fourteenth Amendment's guarantee of "substantive due process" does not include a general right to keep and bear firearms for purposes of private self-defense." And "the use of arms for private self-defense does not warrant federal constitutional protection from state regulation."

So she lied in her confirmation hearings. There's no other word for it. But then the ends always justify the means for a Statist... and make no mistake, Elena Kagan is a Statist of the same order.

When Kagan can't even come up with a broad general opinion or expression of her view in response to Sentor Coburn, on whether or not the "commerce clause" gives the legislature the unlimited and absolute power to pass laws that for example, would dictate to the American people what they may or may not eat. Really? No opinion? No answer?

When Senator Sessions questions Kagan about her political stance as a "Progressive" she responds; "Honestly, I don't know what that label means." Really??? Now Kagan may not have ANY experience as a Judge, and very very little as an actual practicing attorney, but she is vastly experienced in politics as an activist and servant to two White House administrations. So on the face of it, that's a little hard to believe she doesn't know what a "Progressive" is. But then later in the hearing she openly admits to Senator Graham that her "political views are generally progressive." So apparently she wasn't being "honest" with Senator Sessions. This begs the question - How much justice can one expect from a dishonest Justice?

And those are just hints from cover about what's inside the book. Read the book on Kagan. Who has she been influenced by? What are her true values and beliefs?

What role has brother Marc Kagan played in the development of her ideology?

"I would like to thank my brother Marc Kagan whose involvement in radical causes led me to explore the history of American radicalism and the in hope of clarifying my own political ideas." ~ Elena Kagan, dedication of her Princeton history thesis on socialism in New York City.

In that thesis Kagan lamented the decline of socialism in the country as "sad" for those who still hope to "change America." OMG... I just got a chill.

Who is Aharon Barak and why is he Elena Kagan's "Judicial Hero"?

"A judge may give a statute new meaning, a dynamic meaning, that seeks to bridge the gap between the law and life's changing reality..." ~ Aharon Barak

Call your Senator today and tell him/her; REJECT ELENA KAGAN.

Partial Birth Abortions is stealing human souls.

Especially when they are in the 3rd trimester of pregnancy and we've had success in saving babies much less developed than that.

I can't be any more clear than that.

Is it too late to late-term abort Kagan?

"Then the doctor puncture's the baby's skull and suctions out his brains."

puncture's? Why the apostrophe?

If you allow abortion (any method) in EVERY case of rape, incest and where the mother's health is in danger, you'd still only be talking about a VERY small percentage of the total number of abortions performed.

The vast majority of abortions are simply a birth control device used by women who do no more soul-searching about snuffing out their baby's life than they would about padding their expense account. All the talk about a woman's "choice" and "control of her body" is meaningless. She made her "choice" and "controlled her body" when she opened her legs.

Abortion is murder, and partial-birth abortion is an abomination. Promoters of it, such as Kagan and Obama, are simply evil.

Abortion is the termination of a human life. If a human life is taken under legal authority after all stays have been exhausted we call it an execution. Both are terminal. Usually, those that favor abortion for any or no reason also favor saving the life of those sentenced to execution. So kill the innocent and save the guilty. Shame on those who work in either or both theaters.

Abortion is the termination of a human life. If a human life is taken under legal authority after all stays have been exhausted we call it an execution. Both are terminal. Usually, those that favor abortion for any or no reason also favor saving the life of those sentenced to execution. So kill the innocent and save the guilty. Shame on those who work in either or both theaters.

If a perpetrator causes the death of a fetus in the womb during commision of a crime, he/she can, and likely will, be charged with murder. This would indicate that the fetus must indeed be a humann being. So where then, is the confusion regarding the 'status' of the fetus when it comes to abortion? Or do our 'justices' suppose to place the power of God in the hands of the mother carrying said fetus? I can't find any moral or logical arguement for this detestable behavior.

To Maurice Rogerson

Sadly there is no confusion. The difference is that abortion is sanctioned by the government. You must remember, that in the world of the Social Progressivism the government is ultimate arbiter and dispenser of rights... Not God, or a Creator, or any law of Nature or Nature's God. In the perfect Socialist Utopia the government decides what is right or wrong, who has rights and who doesn't, what those rights are, and to whom each "law" will apply or not apply.

To a government operating under the ideology of Social Progressivism, people are property and a resource belonging to the government. Thus, through abortion, the government grants the right to one part of it's property to terminate the existence of another part of it's property. In the case of a crime committed against a mother, where the fetus dies as result - here the criminal has committed a crime against the government by depriving it of a resource without sanction or permission, so the criminal must be punished.

Conversely, in a society where the government is operating under the First Principles of Americanism, all people, as outlined in the Declaration of Independence, have unalienable rights endowed by their creator or Nature's God and among those are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Government doesn't dispense those rights, we all have them, with or without government. Recognizing the need for government to maintain some order in society the founders established a government whose sole purpose was to guard and defend those rights.

The Bill of Rights were added to the Constitution, NOT as a grant from the government, but as an acknowledgement of certain rights that all citizens possess and which the government is not permitted to restrict or otherwise tinker with. Under a government faithful to the Declaration and the Constitution, the government belongs to the people... NOT the other way around.

Another nightmare for America, courtesy of the Obamunists. They say we get the government we deserve, but why do I have to get the government those infantile liberals deserve?

These statist concepts were commenced, in earnest, in 1932 with FDR. The expansion of statist concepts have now reached into every aspect of American life. eg; "the death penalty is unjust." (unconstitutional is the usual word). Yet it is now O.K. to murder a living human being in a most heinous procedure--partial birth abortion. Folks, we cannot sustain this Republic by permiting such statists to continue to legislate. Or, worse, the Presidential privilege of 'dictating' a personal whim. Which rumor has it the President is considering to create 'amnesty' for the aliens present in the USA. The Presidential Pardon. Hello?

It is time to persuade our appointed representatives in Congress to stop this statism. Articles of Impeachment are called for, daily! A life appointment of Kagan is a crime against the Republic! A real triple threat with Sotomayor,Ginsberg, and Kagan.

Why do dems think it is okay to kill a baby but not an animal? Just askin'...