The insinuation (mostly by the likes of Sen. Sessions) that Elana Kagan hates the military is not only unfounded, but is just the sort of non-issue, knee-jerk politics that continues to plague the Republican party. What is meaningful in bringing to light the obvious choice of a Harvard Law dean to restrict recruiters on the basis of DADT’s conflicting with the school’s anti-discrimination policies?
She will adequately praise the military; she will be confirmed, anyway.
What about the deeper issues? What about “original intent”? So far, these have been granted standard fare questions, and been given standard fare responses.
We saw this same sort of “g*d d*mned cop-hating, military-hating liberals” politics with Sonia Sotomayor, in re the firefighter case. Sure, Republican senators are thusly adequately covering the “f**k liberals” base, but what about the “Constitutional republic” base? What about the “enumerated liberties” base? What about the “future for our children and grandchildren” base?
Republican leadership in the House and Senate are not only borderline corrupt, but have hijacked conservative/republican/what-ever-have-you principles for the sake of partisanship, and have made confirmation hearings, especially, a game of “these liberals hate real America, and they’re probably gay, so join me in opposing the dandy Democratic conspiracy to teach our kindergarteners fisting.” Not that they’re wrong in opposing such things, per se, but I wonder, why are they worried about college non-discrimination policies while the very foundations of wealth and liberty are collapsing? Wait, I just answered that.