In a rare blip of actual substance, Kagan revealed she would not move to overturn a law mandating every citizen eat a congressionally-prescribed amount of vegetable every day. If Congress can tell us what to eat under threat of prosecution, what can they not do? (See George Will’s questions for Elena Kagan here and here)
Prosecute Kagan for Lying to Congress
Kagan also professed ignorance of the term “Judicial Progressivism.” This and her her studied agnosticism on natural rights (upon which our nation was founded), are enough to indict her for lying to Congress.
She was dean of Harvard Law School and she knows nothing of these issues? Either Harvard got ripped off big time, or she’s a liar.
If a Man Can Grant it to You, A Man can Take it Away
Jacob Sullum, in his excellent Reason article explains the importance of natural rights:
Constitutional interpretation aside, Kagan's reluctance to endorse the concept of pre-existing rights was troubling because without it we cannot draw moral distinctions between legal regimes.I include the two George Will articles because they are good thought pieces that help us ordinary folks think through constitutional concepts with concrete, real-world questions.
How can we condemn a dictator for legally authorized oppression, or say that our own Constitution is better now that it bans slavery than it was when it tacitly approved the practice?
The traditional American answer is that people have certain rights by virtue of being human, regardless of what the law says.
* - Kagan years ago called Supreme Court nomination hearings, "Vapid and hollow charades."
8 comments:
The practice by progressives of selective ignorance regarding issues they want to control but for which they do not want to be held accountable is so frustrating and maddening! I think it is one of their most dangerous characteristics. The Obama progressives have proven themselves to be masters of deception. They pretended to be centrist in order to be elected, and then pulled out all the stops to govern from the EXTREME left. Kagan is guilty of the same thing. She is willing to lie in order to win the appointment, but we all know from her past writings that her opinions, once she is confirmed, will be far left. Conservatives MUST filibuster her appointment. She will be a danger to liberty for decades as a member of the Court.
Good post as the woman should be prosecuted for the lies and how any conservative could vote for her is beyond me. This court though is bigger than the presidency except for when they get to choose.
They are dangerous liars aren't they Linda. And anyone who's caught lying lies all the time, that's my motto. In government. And that's almost all of them all the time, but liberals have no souls so they're better at it.
I just love the irony of how her own sanctimonious words came back to haunt her.
Kagan, not Linda! Linda has her head screwed on straight and knows how to express herself. Linda would be a much better Supreme Court justice , imho.
She will pass, but even though she is appointed for life, I believe she can still be impeached.
>they want to control but for which they do not want to be held accountable
They're adolescents. They may have aged physically, but psychologically they are adolescents. Teenagers want to be in control, to break away from mom and dad and any other authority figure above them, but they also want to be financed carried along. Basically, teenagers want it to be all about themselves. That's what we get with the so-called "liberals."
Kagan revealed she would not move to overturn a law mandating every citizen eat a congressionally-prescribed amount of vegetable every day.
Gah!
The madness continues to grow!
Progressive is a nice way of saying Marxist.
Trestin: I use progressive because calling these doctrinaire statists "liberal" is a gross misuse of the term. There is nothing classically liberal about them.
Post a Comment