June 30, 2010

Bloody Elena

Elena Kagan is making me start to wish... nah, I better not say what I think:

Before the Senate Judiciary Committee a short time ago, Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan appeared reluctant to admit that she wrote a 1996 Clinton White House memo aimed at altering a key medical group's opinion of whether partial birth abortion is medically necessary. The memo, reported yesterday by National Review, has caused a stir in conservative circles because it appeared that Kagan, then a White House policy aide, put words in the medical group's mouth in order to soften its position on the controversial procedure. But when Republican Sen. Orrin Hatch brought the subject up with Kagan, he had a hard time getting her to admit that she did, in fact, write the document in question.

"Did you write that memo?" Hatch asked.

"Senator, with respect," Kagan began, "I don't think that that's what happened "

"Did you write that memo?"

"I'm sorry the memo which is?"

"The memo that caused them to go back to the language of 'medically necessary,' which was the big issue to begin with "

"Yes, well, I've seen the document "

"But did you write it?"

"The document is certainly in my handwriting."

Kagan doesn't want to admit that she is an pro-infanticide zealot, nor that she twisted the position of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) on late-term abortion to suit her political goals.

The inherent dishonesty in her character and her blood-thirsty ideological bent proves she is in no way suited for the Supreme Court. Senate Republicans and pro-life Democrats must filibuster Kagan.

A killer's accomplice is hardly fit to be judge.

Posted by Confederate Yankee at June 30, 2010 12:54 PM
A killer's accomplice is hardly fit to be judge.

Unless you are a Democrat, of course.

But which is worse? The Democrats who only care about amassing power and influence or the Republicans who claim to know better but roll over in the slightest breeze?

Posted by: iconoclast at June 30, 2010 03:18 PM

There was a time when something like this would derail a nomination, and in a reasonably bipartisan fashion. Such is the environment in DC that it will be at best a minor blip. Odd, when an unproved allegation, or a passionate speech, based on nothing, can still do so.

Posted by: Tregonsee at June 30, 2010 03:49 PM

Do her words after being asked if she wrote the memo remind you of someone special? She is a walking talking clone of slick willie! What an evading weasel! Can you imagine her assent/dissent on any issue that she will write as a justice of SCOTUS? It will be so opaque that no one will ever know the true meaning of it.

Posted by: inspectorudy at June 30, 2010 05:24 PM

They all suck. There is really little difference in the two parties, except that it is obvious that the Dems are trying their best to destroy the country.

Remember when they went on for a week or more over the fact that Thomas was concerned over a pubic hair on his coke can?

Posted by: David at June 30, 2010 07:39 PM

Technically speaking, even when abortion was much more widely illegal, it was never on the same level, legally speaking, as murder. So while one might feel that it is tantamount to murder, it's not a terribly productive argument.

However, what Kagan did clearly illustrates a significant and debilitating lack of character and honesty in a legal matter of national importance. Not qualities we would like to see missing in a Supreme Court Justice. That alone is sufficient to disqualify her. "The document is certainly in my handwriting," doesn't help.

Posted by: mikemcdaniel at June 30, 2010 10:32 PM

If she can't even speak plain english and answer the straightforward question on authorship, she isn't honest and forthright enough to hold any public office.

Posted by: ruralcounsel at July 2, 2010 08:33 AM