Here We Go Again by William Pitt

[sinkingfeeling]

http://www.truthout.org/here-we-go-again59371

Kagan is hardly a radical pick, despite what we will almost certainly be hearing from the usual suspects on the right. She is the second woman Obama has nominated to the high court, a fact that will please many and disturb a few. She has been a trailblazer throughout her career, becoming the first woman to serve both as solicitor general and dean of Harvard Law School. She clerked for Justice Thurgood Marshall in her youth, a fact the right will almost certainly be used to tag her as being too liberal for the court.

Kagan's views on a number of hot-button issues are not hard to discern, however. She is a capital-D Democrat and squarely on the side of choice. She could become the most adamantly pro-gay rights justice in history if she wins the seat; while dean of the Harvard Law School, she barred military recruiters from operating on campus because of the anti-gay discrimination at the core of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell." This "transcript" of Kagan debating with Justices Stevens and Kennedy on the power and rights of corporations as pertaining to the controversial "Citizens United" case would seem to make it evident that she stands firmly with the left on the dangers represented by that decision.

Few issues raise more consternation and rage on the left than the constitutional crisis created by the deranged activities of the Bush administration. This isn't just a problem for the far reaches of American liberalism, but an across-the-board complaint from a majority of the citizenry. Liberals will point to this in disgust and accuse Obama of moving the Supreme Court even further to the right, and will likely serve to further erode the Democratic base's support for his administration. If she does indeed prove to be a proponent of unfettered presidential power, the unitary executive crisis unleashed by Bush will continue unabated.

Again, a great deal of this will come out in the wash when the confirmation hearings get underway, and her performance and statements during those hearings will play a supreme role in determining where opinions of her will come down. For the time being, however, the nomination of Kagan appears to be another example of the president leading with his chin. This time, however, the lion's share of punches are going to come from the left side of the ring.

[Name removed]

1. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Vinnie From Indy]

2. Pitt makes some good points

I will echo the idea that her confirmation hearings should flesh some things out a bit more and we will have a clearer understanding of her mind. Her work as SG, I do not believe, should be judged on her positions but more on her performance. In this role she was performing as an employee and arguing the Admin.'s position.

As far as Obama leading with his chin, I would offer that this was a supremely UNCOURAGEOUS choice. She was chosen in part due to her almost blank slate of past judicial writings.

I doubt that this will be deleted or locked as Pitt's sanction was that he could no longer interact on the board, not that his words and ideas would be forever banned.

[CTyankee]

4. What happened? I hadn't seen anything amiss with Pitt.

Just a couple of weeks ago he interacted with one of my posts...

[mike_c]

10. he sent a rather vile and threatening PM to a DUer....

I've seen it. I won't repeat it here because it will probably get the thread locked, and because I don't have the recipient's permission. But it deserved banning. It was way over the top, spittle flying, anger management needing, and threatened violence. Bad juju.

[hlthe2b]

6. The fact that the mere mention

of the author's name results in such action has made me rethink >9 years of membership for the first time ever. Seriously and without hyperbole. Ironically I just donated--small amount but as much as I could afford. I hope all involved take a step back and reassess.

[blm]

7. I concur

.

[hlthe2b]

9. My grandmother had an adage...

React badly (overreact) to a situation--no matter how right you are-- will surely make you a loser in the end.

[CTyankee]

11. That is so true. Once things are said they can't be unsaid...

A good trick is to get all the venom out in a saved file on your computer, sleep on it for a night or two, then open the file and read what you wrote while in the heat of anger. You've had a chance for your mind to mull things over (sleep does that in a funny way) and gives you another shot at refining your message. It works...

[uppityperson]

12. and me

[grasswire]

14. WHAT???? !!!!!!

Will is gone from DU?

That's just nuts.

[Mopar151]

16. I would concur..

If it involves certain incoherent responses to one of Will's posts, I likely lambasted the same person. And the attack on Will, in that instance, was unwarranted and a little creepy.

[Name removed]

3. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[FSogol]

5. DUzy! n/t

[jaksavage]

8. William Pitt will always be

high on my list of great posters.

[Control-Z]

13. He has always been one of my very favorites.

I don't know all that happened, but did read a bit of the offending post. Someone really pushed his buttons, that much is clear.

[faceit]

15. She argued to ban late term abortion in the Clinton administration.

She agreed with Lindsey Graham on terrorist detention policies.


Did you see the video on Rachel Maddow where she played audio where she literally stammered REPEATEDLY in the case where she FAILED to make the argument to stop corporations from spending unlimited money in elections?

It was embarrassing. This nominee is as shameful as the Miers nomination.

Completely unqualifed. Why the hell should the base have to GUESS, if they are going to have a judicial pick that isn't a corporate shill?

[Supply Side Jesus]

17. wrong thread

try again