ABOUT FIRST READ

First Read is an analysis of the day's political news, from the NBC News political unit. First Read is updated throughout the day, so check back often.

Chuck Todd, NBC Political Director

Mark Murray, NBC Deputy Political Director

Domenico Montanaro, NBC News Political Reporter



Videos target 3 SCOTUS front-runners

Posted: Monday, May 18, 2009 4:03 PM by Mark Murray
Filed Under: , ,

From NBC's Pete Williams

Saying it wants to be prepared when President Obama announces a nominee, a conservative group has prepared short internet-only ads, attacking three of the women most often mentioned as potential Supreme Court choices.

The Judicial Confirmation Network, which pushed strongly for the nominations of John Roberts and Samuel Alito during the Bush administration, says Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor, and Diane Wood are not moderates or centrists. "They are hard-left activists who would decide cases based on their feelings and their personal political agendas," said Wendy Long, a former law clerk to Justice Clarence Thomas

The video on Elena Kagan criticizes her decision, as dean of Harvard's law school, to re-impose a ban on allowing military recruiters access to law school facilities. Kagan said Harvard's anti-discrimination policy required the action, because the military does not permit gay people to serve. The ad says she "kicked the military off campus, incredibly during a time of war."

The video on Wood criticizes her opinion that would have denied use of campus facilities by a Christian group that declined to allow gay students to join. And it says that her abortion protest ruling, which upheld the use of federal racketeering laws against anti-abortion demonstrators, was overturned by the Supreme Court.

And the video against Sonia Sotomayor takes her to task for rejecting a reverse discrimination lawsuit filed by New Haven firefighters. They sued after the city threw out the results of a written promotion test when the results showed that no African-American firefighters would have qualified for promotion.

"Every American understands the sacrifices firefighters make. But in Sotomayor's court, the content of your character is not as important as the color of your skin," the ad says.

MAIN PAGE

Email this EMAIL THIS

Comments

No, No, No, No...and No

Reminds me of a 2 year old who has just learned a new word and that is all they can repeat!

What a bunch of loosers.
They've got time for this; but they never bothered to go back to that 'budget' they published without numbers and "Fill in the Blanks".  Wow, if they think they are in touch with American priorities, they should probably just STOP thinking all together, now.
--------
Out of touch, much?  The new G"NO"P, same as the old.
I'm sorry, but the idea that a former law clerk to Clarence Thomas, probably the least qualified justice, is objective is laughable.  Does this not describe Justice Thomas  "He is a hard-right activist who would decide cases based on his feelings and his personal political agenda".  
While I can understand their criticisms of Wood and Sotomayor (actually based upon legal decisions), what does the decision of a woman made while she was president of Harvard have to do with her judicial philosophy and temperament?  

Oh wait, its just a cheap political attack designed to make people think she hates the military.  Duh!
And the Republicans wonder why their support is shrinking.  It is actions like these that drove people like me away from the party.  And how is the Hispanic community going to view this? They're on their way from a big tent (which I never felt they achieved but they gave lip service to) to a pup tent.  Hope their base enjoys it there.
The conservative spin machine has nothing better to do that to pick ticky tack arguments with the President. I am not surprised with their tactics, but simply dismayed with their lack of grace.

Their labeling of these three qualified jurists as "hard left activists" does nothing to advance the dialog. I hope the President goes further left in response!
Another group saying that only their ideas should be promoted...  Not a big surprise here.  Have these people even talked to the possible nominees?  I doubt it because that would supporting those that "aren't us."
Sounds like they have the right amount of "empathy" that Obama is looking for.  But the law is the law and should be upheld, NOT based on someone's skin color or religious preference.
This just shows how ridiculous these extreme right wing fringe interest groups really are. They're opposed to all the top candidates for the position. They will be opposed to whoever gets the appointment What do they wish to attain? To have the position go unfilled until they get a conservative President?
Unbelievable!
I'm sorry, but the idea that a former law clerk to Clarence Thomas, probably the least qualified justice, is objective is laughable.  Does this not describe Justice Thomas  "He is a hard-right activist who would decide cases based on his feelings and his personal political agenda".  
Alan, NJ (Sent Monday, May 18, 2009 4:11 PM)

-------------------------------------

I whole-heartedly disagree.  Justice Clarence Thomas does not decide cases based on his feelings and political agenda...he decides them based on Antonin Scalia's feelings and political agenda.
Clarence Thomas is the embodiment of what a SCOTUS Justice is supposed to be. His temperment is right on, as a strict constructionist, and his experience was flawless.  He is great, and I hope Obama picks someone just like him!
"They are hard-left activists who would decide cases based on their feelings and their personal political agendas," said Wendy Long, a former law clerk to Justice Clarence Thomas.

---------------------------------------

Isn't that precious...nice to know you can always count on the GOP for the "I Know You Are But What Am I" defense.
Anyone who has woorked for Clarence Thomas can not be...shall we say "fair and unbiased"
The diatribe against Ms. Kagan is just that, to exacerbate the fake antimilitary feelings. The firefighters test was as biased as they come

So just shut up and give the money wasted in the ads to charity
Good grief.  The least the GOP could do is wait until there's an actual named nominee.  Typical, all they know is attack and NO.  We have enough right wing ideologues on the Supreme Court without adding another one with such narrow right wing views.  It's like watching a soap opera.  More prooof that the right thinks only their views, opinions, ideology, religion is correct; apparently there's no room at the inn for anyone who dares to be moderate or liberal.
Give them another week and they will have video's on a dozen more possible candidates.

Got to be well prepared to full announce the collective big NO.

Got to love it!
Videos? Is 50 Cent or Nelly in any of them?
I whole-heartedly disagree.  Justice Clarence Thomas does not decide cases based on his feelings and political agenda...he decides them based on Antonin Scalia's feelings and political agenda.
Pete - Albany, NY (Sent Monday, May 18, 2009 4:35 PM)

Proof? Or this just another one of your drug induced visions.
Ed, FW TX - The conservative spin machine has nothing better to do that to pick ticky tack arguments with the President.

Yeah, that record $3.6T of deficit spending - just "ticky tack" stuff.
The Republican rant over justices is a clear indication of how politically motivated are their own pics. Objective justices have been rare. They are always either favorable to conservative or less conservative views. The really are very seldom liberal no matter what the rabid right says.
Anita Hill for SCOTUS.....in all FAIRNESS.
The right would likely say that Sara Palin fairminded justice material. There are no justices that are un effected by their environment, their education, and all other experiences. It is not honest to paint them as somehow above it all. They never have been.
Haven't they already admitted that this nominee bashing effort is all about getting more cash from the ever shrinking hard right base than it is about the outcome? What could be more cynical?

Cynical and angry seems to be the modern face of conservatism.
I whole-heartedly disagree.  Justice Clarence Thomas does not decide cases based on his feelings and political agenda...he decides them based on Antonin Scalia's feelings and political agenda.
Pete - Albany, NY (Sent Monday, May 18, 2009 4:35 PM)

Proof? Or this just another one of your drug induced visions.
Re Peate, Detroit MI (Sent Monday, May 18, 2009 4:55 PM)

I don't know about having proof, but it sounds about right. Plus it's funny as hell.

Thanks, Pete. And I agree with you 100%.
Proof? Or this just another one of your drug induced visions.
Re Peate, Detroit MI (Sent Monday, May 18, 2009 4:55 PM)

-------------------------------

Did somebody say "drugs"?
Off topic…

However, it appears that the ‘honorable’ (yeah right!) RNC leader (you know the one… ‘Kid DyNOmite’) once again is going back on his word…  he’s back peddling on his claim yesterday that he was open to a ‘torture probe’  WOW that lasted a WHOLE 24 hours – Lord Limpballs must be of given him a good whoop in!
In a situation where the SC splits in their decision is the minority wrong and therefor incompetent to serve?  If one of the nominees has had an opinion overturned, so what.  The question is, is the nominee competent in their knowledge of teh law and do they have the character to provide their best interpretaton of the constitution as manifest in law.

Who does not have an opinion on abortion, prayer in schools, equal access etc.?  The challenge is to select an individual that can get past their personal opinion and vote in support of the rule of law.
Isn't that precious...nice to know you can always count on the GOP for the "I Know You Are But What Am I" defense.
Sluggo (Sent Monday, May 18, 2009 4:38 PM)

Good one!! Yes, otherwise known as the "Peewee Herman defense".



SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=1936057

First Read e-mail alerts


Sign up for First Read alerts
The first place for key political news and analysis

Syndicate This Site

Add First Read to your news reader:
live.com xml
myyahoo msn
bloglines newsgator
google