Reply #98: Whoops -- I said nothing of the sort about pressuring the Party or

[saltpoint]

other entities -- corporations especially -- and said nothing about quieting dissent.

But there is a dismissive quality to the original objection to Kagan. I spoke in defense of her qualifications and I will reassert that it is an important plus to have more women in judicial roles.

I have contempt and ridicule for idiotic critics, yes. Not thoughtful ones, not sleeves-rolled-up ones, not at all. My family is long-ago rooted to LaFollette progressive politics. We maintain those connections today. The "Left"'s case against Kagan is a doomed commitment. She's very likely to be confirmed. She will be in fact more intelligent than the Republican Senators questioning her in the confirmation hearings.

You wanted someone else instead? So did I. Suck it up. That's how the game is played. It doesn't conform to my wishes and expectations and it doesn't conform to yours either. If it's too disappointing both of us can join a Buddhist monastery in Asia and just chill out for the rest of our days on earth.

If we stay here, though, we accept the landscape as presented. We don't have to endorse all of it but we should appreciate the parts of it that genuinely beckon us toward our citizenship in our country. Elena Kagan is smart, and tough, and wiley, and IMO likely to break that 5-4 block, or in any case, as qualified as someone could be given the recalcitrance of Scalia and Thomas and Roberts.

You would have to admit that your response to my speaking up for Kagan was dismissive.