There is something profoundly depressing about the nomination of Elena Kagan.
Kagan has an impressive resume. But ...
Has there ever been a more intellectually bland nominee? Probably, but not in decades. Bland is the new intellectual powerhouse.
No judicial record. Little public or scholarly record. A private record of time served in government, but those advisory positions would say little about what Elena thought, as opposed to what she advised.
Even Kagan's seemingly bold statement on gay marriage was so carefully worded as to allow for intellectual blandness if pressed at the hearings. (She will be pressed on this, right?)
A life of carefully choreographed liberal blandness deemed necessary to achieve the goal of being precisely where she is today.
Few clues left along the bland trail of her intellectual life not only as to what she believes, but in what she believes. Does hiring conservatives as Dean of Harvard Law School mean Kagan .... oh, forget it.
Blandness in the service of getting on the Supreme Court is no vice.
Thanks Teddy, for so beating the crap out of Robert Bork that you set us on the road to Elena Kagan. Elena Kagan is the nominee we have been waiting for.
Al Franken fell asleep the first day of the hearings.
It's working.
--------------------------------------------
Related Posts:
131 Law School Deans Fail To Sign Letter Supporting Kagan
My Class Reunion, Elena Edition
Kagan Said She Meant What She Said About Gay Marriage
Follow me on Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube
A shapeless blob in every way
ReplyDeletelol
I think that "bland" also describes the attributes of a mole or sleeper. Your point on Robert Bork's confirmation hearing is well taken. "Under the radar" also comes to mind.
ReplyDeleteProgressives, keep nudging the sleeping electoral giant.
Thanks, Professor.
I resent the fact that the president has nominated two unmarried women who are not mothers. As a married woman and mother, I honestly feel put out by this choice. I think the old maid is overrepresented on the court if that is the aim of the new fair and diverse view of the court. Obama has a pair, he's hoping for a spare with the next retirement.
ReplyDeleteCarefully choreographed is the key here. A politician who doesn't state their position publicly has nothing in terms of a voting record or otherwise to stop them from getting to high positions. Take "The Ever-'Present' Obama" URL here http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/02/the_everpresent_obama.html. This man made as few votes as possible on major bills to avoid letting others know his positions. Then, miraculously, the Democrats pole vault him - this junior senator - in to the seat of Presidency over Hillary Clinton and other possible candidates from the left whom everyone knew where they stood on issues. We now know HIS agenda. Unfortunately, this is the left's "means justifies the end" way of getting people in office for fundamental overturning of principles. They launch a propaganda campaign to paint a seemingly neutral actor as a force for good, etc, and yet, when they are in office, they peel back layer after layer as an onion with decisions they make, and policies they support. This is a very dangerous game of Russian Roulette people are playing with the country when they vote for or support someone who is not absolutely clear with their principals. Why should they avoid or hide from these questions? Because the sunlight would kill them politically.
ReplyDelete"The concept of neutrality can lead to a brooding and pervasive devotion to the secular and a passive, or even active, hostility to the religious. Such results are not only not compelled by the Constitution, but, it seems to me, are prohibited by it."
Arthur J. Goldberg
Kagan is to jurisprudence what the vuvuzela is to music.
ReplyDeleteSomething not so bland: She flat out lied to the Supremes in last years 9/11 case. If any senator exposes these lies, it could force Congress to clarify the law she lied about (the domestic tort exception to sovereign immunity), enabling the 9/11 families suit to proceed.
ReplyDeleteThat would be downright fun (and Kagan would be gone).
www.errortheory.blogspot.com/2010/06/kagan-lied-to-supreme-court-in-911-case.html
Kagan also lied in the partial birth abortion case to the Supreme Court. Why no one has filed a disciplinary complaint against her for that fraud, is beyond understanding.
ReplyDeleteOh, because it's all jokes and fun at the confirmation hearings ♥☺♥!!
ReplyDeletehttp://news.yahoo.com/s/ynews/ynews_pl2948
This type of coverage of the supreme court candidate sickens me. No mention of any possible issues or problems, just a little sweetheart piece showing what a huckster this little darling is. This kind of yellow journalism has no cure except amputation.