dagblog - Comments for "Obama Trades Rule Of Law For Easy Confirmation Of Kagan"

"Anthony Kennedy, who Kagan

brewmn61 — Tue, 11 May 2010 19:57:05 +0000

In reply to Obama Trades Rule Of Law For Easy Confirmation Of Kagan

"Anthony Kennedy, who Kagan seems to be very similar to ideologically..."

What is your basis for this statement, exactly?

Since you seem to like to

artappraiser — Tue, 11 May 2010 19:53:33 +0000

In reply to Obama Trades Rule Of Law For Easy Confirmation Of Kagan

Since you seem to like to create narratives from supposition without much basis in fact, i.e. "Obama Trades Rule Of Law For Easy Confirmation Of Kagan," let me offer an alternate story: "Obama, the ever so slightly left-of-center centrist, and past Constituional professor, decides to appoint someone he knows as a liberal to the Supreme Court in order to balance its current conservative slant, one who doesn't have the habit of wearing her liberal sentiments on her sleeve, so it will be hard to label her as such, and one who learned over her career to interact in a crafty way with legal minds of conservative persuasion." I admit my narrative could be just as off as yours, we'll see, but I'd be willing to bet that in a couple of years you'll be defending her.

I happened to catch Greenwald

artappraiser — Tue, 11 May 2010 19:39:11 +0000

In reply to Obama Trades Rule Of Law For Easy Confirmation Of Kagan

I happened to catch Greenwald on Rachel Maddow last night and he didn't seem to have much of anything to say at all except that she's a blank slate. Sound and fury signifying nothing, when he's called to support his screeds, it seems he can't remember what they were:

http://maddowblog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2010/05/11/4267333-greenwald-kagan-is-too-blank-a-slate

Seems to me people like you and him are crazily overreacting based on a narrative you've developed about Obama being the continuation of the font of all evil that you must continue and feed with hyerbole, and you can't manage anymore to judge his actions and policies individually. You wrote this post before you knew much about her at all, and now you feel you have to continue to support what you said.

You really are a symphony

brewmn61 — Tue, 11 May 2010 19:29:01 +0000

In reply to Obama Trades Rule Of Law For Easy Confirmation Of Kagan

You really are a symphony consisting of a single (off-key) note, aren't you?

hack

oleeb — Tue, 11 May 2010 19:15:06 +0000

In reply to Obama Trades Rule Of Law For Easy Confirmation Of Kagan

hack

You are nothing but a hack

oleeb — Tue, 11 May 2010 19:14:07 +0000

In reply to Obama Trades Rule Of Law For Easy Confirmation Of Kagan

You are nothing but a hack apologist and blind follower of anything Obama says or does. You have no independt thoughts and are a tribalist. You are a shameless adminstration troll.

AA, this is a deliberate

oleeb — Tue, 11 May 2010 19:09:52 +0000

In reply to Obama Trades Rule Of Law For Easy Confirmation Of Kagan

AA, this is a deliberate falsification of what Greenwald and others have claimed and is, I suspect, part of the administration's concerted effort to attack anyone who dares to point out the nagging problems with Kagan.

Obama voted against Roberts.

brewmn61 — Tue, 11 May 2010 16:37:40 +0000

In reply to Obama Trades Rule Of Law For Easy Confirmation Of Kagan

Obama voted against Roberts. Kagan's been known to senior Democrats for decades now (she worked in the Clinton administration). Unless you truly believe that the Democrats are just as eager to establish feudal economic conditions and a police state in service of the oligarchy as the Republicans, you have to believe she'll be a decent pick, if not the best we could have hoped for.

I honestly think Obama believes he's appointing the liberal Roberts. Someone with the intellectual heft, political savvy, and yes, potential for longevity on the bench to leave a lasting judicial legacy. But at a certain point, you have to trust that he's not going to appoint a Souter in reverse. I mean, there are no sure things in life; he could appoint Harold Koh and have him get hit by a bus on the way to his first session.

So sorry, "AJM" Sorry,

Overreach THIS! — Tue, 11 May 2010 13:05:03 +0000

In reply to Obama Trades Rule Of Law For Easy Confirmation Of Kagan

So sorry, "AJM" Sorry, sorry.

Anna, how do we pick? There

Overreach THIS! — Tue, 11 May 2010 12:58:50 +0000

In reply to Obama Trades Rule Of Law For Easy Confirmation Of Kagan

Anna, how do we pick? There is no guarantee about what any justice will do. We are human beings and anyone can turn into a Scalia or even a Cheney, or also a Brennan. So we guess.

What we have to pick is someone who can replace a powerhouse minority justice who was appointed by Republicans, and nobody can actually replace that man, who is a giant. Hopefully somebody who can do more than simply replace the fourth losing vote each time. There is no doubt that she is a strong, strong person, and that is needed. That's the strategy they're pursuing. If we get to replace one of the five in the conservative majority, it's a different ballgame, of course.

I don't think Obama would have nominated her, "my friend" who he knows for 15 years or so if he didn't have a good idea what was going on here. But it may backfire, no question. That is always true.