Obama's Monstrous Regiment

If anyone was in any doubt, following the appointment of Sonia Sotomayor to the US Supreme Court, that Obama had an unfriendly agenda, will have been disabused of that doubt by the nomination of Solicitor General Elena Kagan to replace the retiring Justice John Paul Stephens.

After having first appointed a Hispanic feminist with a history of racist judgement and anti (white) male rhetoric, Obama now seeks to foist another radical feminist on the American public, this time one with a very unfriendly attitude towards the free speech provisions of the First Amendment to the US Constitution.

Elena Kagan is, of course, also politically correct right to the tips of her wide fitting pumps and served as White House Council during the Clinton administration. However, it is her attitude towards free speech and her writings on the subject which will give many pause for thought, Whilst a tenured professor at University of Chicago Law School she published amongst other things a law review article on the "Regulation of Hate Speech”, which she linked with pornography in the manner with which a dishonest politicians will link an agenda driven issue with an otherwise unconnected but emotive subject, so as to merge the two concepts in the public mind.

(We await the “Love immigration hate paedophiles” initiative with bated breath)

In this she wrote”"I take it as a given that we live in a society marred by racial and gender inequality, that certain forms of speech perpetuate and promote this inequality, and that the uncoerced disappearance of such speech would be cause for great elation."

Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't the vital importance of protecting free speech amplified when that speech goes against the popular orthodoxies of the day?

Of perhaps greater interest was "Private Speech, Public Purpose: The Role of Governmental Motive in First Amendment Doctrine," an article Kagan also wrote whist at Chicago. Obama's power base, discussing governmental regulation of speech in general. In that article Kagan went further and argued it may be proper to suppress speech because it is offensive to society or indeed to the government.

Once can imagine Stalin nodding with approval at such an assertion

Kagan's name was also on a brief, United States V. Stevens,which chillingly states: "Whether a given category of speech enjoys First Amendment protection depends upon a categorical balancing of the value of the speech against its societal costs."

The US Supreme Court is the highest judicial court in America, it is the final appellate court, its decisions can impact upon US society and beyond for generations.

The fact that Obama's first two nominations for the Supreme court have been such extreme examples of radical feminist, anti male any white pro-affirmative action anti free speech repressive political correctness tells us as much about him and his mission as it does about these two rather unpleasant women.