On Judicial Confirmations

This week is the hearing for the latest Supreme Court nominee, Elena Kagan. All the lead up, then all week at these hearings, we will have the same blow hard fake hand wringing that happens with every nominee. No matter what the party of the president, we get the same pledge of finding a nominee that will listen carefully to each case that comes before them… blah, blah, blah.

If it’s at all possible (and it’s not), let’s just be honest: Kagan is liberal. She has that bent. Obama would not nominate if she had Scalia’s philosophy of the Constitution. Roberts, Scalia, Thomas… conservative. They were nominated because of their stance. The president has that prerogative. So, could we please quit hiding behind all these stupid posturing statements?

Obama nominated Kagan, so Kagan should be confirmed. She will because the Democrats control the process. Yet, even if the Republicans controlled the process, Obama’s nominee should be confirmed. And when Bush I or II were in office, their nominees should have been confirmed. Quit the silly posturing. (We won’t, but it felt good to get that off my chest.)

Tags:

Before:

4 responses to “On Judicial Confirmations”

  1. Amen! It makes me so tired.

  2. Yes, enough already!!! Get on with it.

  3. Well maybe the redeeming value of this is that people realize that elections have consequences.

  4. Judicial appointments might be the best place to realize that, Dave.

Leave a comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.