Way back when, Elena Kagan and Barack Obama lived in the same town and taught at the same school.

Thesis: we should have been looking at Sotomayor differently. She, Kagan and Obama have much the same view when it comes to limiting speech - a post script to what we wrote, below.

Editor's notes: Both have the same point of view with regards to freedom of speech -- some speech should not be allowed and they are the ones qualified to determine the new rules. Read this statement. We think you will here it quoted more and more during the course of the next few weeks. No one, absolutely no one, who crafts such a remark should be allowed to be part of any court of law, much less the Supreme Court. Period.

In 1993, Elena Kagan wrote an article for the University of Chicago Law Review that included this sentence:

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.

Midknight Review wants to drive home the point that Obama is our first subversive president - "subversive" because he is anti-free speech on a number of levels: as pertains to a union elections, the internet, conservative talk radio and TV, his manipulation of the press and refusal to receive antagonistic questioning, his refusal to entertain critical interviews and, now, in his Hamilton commencement speech of weekend before last, where he expressed a decision to label certain speech as harmful to a free democracy. And now, he is appointing people to the courts who agree with his Marxist position. We are wondering if Sotomayor believes much the same, when it comes to free speech. Were we not looking under the right rock? Understand that Jefferson, the author of the First Amendment, believed that if speech was limited at all, it had ceased to be free. --- jds.

Update: with regard to Sotomayor, we found this comment, surprising similar is scope to that of Kagans:

The Sotomayor panel found that calling administrators “douchebags” and encouraging students to “piss off” the principal was “the sort of language that may properly be prohibited in schools.” It also found that because that language created ”a risk of substantial disruption within the school environment,” it could properly be the subject of discipline even though it occurred off campus.

The part that is disturbing is that speech which occurred off campus. We now believe that Obama is stacking the High Court with justices who do not believe that "offensive speech" is free speech. Wake up, America, and smell the Marxist Marvels. -- jds.
.