Today, her hearings for confirmation begin. I am praying that Truth will come to light and that the Republicans who are even now poised for a fight will dig in their heels and keep this woman off the Supreme Court bench. I shudder to think how my children and grandchildren would suffer under this liberal's "interpretation" of the laws of our land.
I did not see Face the Nation on CBS on Sunday, but this quote disturbs me greatly:
"I think you're going to see a brilliant woman, a brilliant legal mind, and you're going to see somebody who is going to be the 112th justice of the U.S. Supreme Court," said Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy on Sunday's "Face the Nation."
But that same argument was made by Justice Samuel Alito's supporters when he was nominated by President Bush in 2005. Alito was widely viewed as intellectually qualified and, as an appellate court judge, highly experienced. He too got the ABA's highest rating and had significant support from liberals -- including his liberal colleagues, who said he was intellectually honest, didn't have an agenda and was not an ideologue.
Nonetheless, then-Senators Barack Obama and Joe Biden, as well as current Judiciary Committee Chairman Leahy not only voted against Alito's nomination -- they also tried to mount a filibuster to block it.
On "Face the Nation" Sunday, Leahy deflected a question about the Democrats' shaky grounds for complaints about a possible Republican filibuster of Kagan, in light of their attempts to block Alito. Their efforts in 2006 were "symbolic at best," Leahy said.
It disturbs me as well as heartens me because I believe the Republicans will do the right thing by vetoing her confirmation. I pray so. We absolutely cannot have a Supreme Court Justice who has an agenda sitting on the bench. Kagan has an agenda, actually she has several. She has been very clear about it, too.
She has stated several times she wants the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" repealed. She is lesbian and has a chip on her shoulder concerning civil liberties, especially concerning GLBT. She is extreme pro-abortion. She is against the right to bear arms, she is pro-bussing (no matter how long a child must ride the bus) for desegregation. Some very strong views she wrote in some memos to Justice Thurgood Marshall whom she clerked for and whom she called her hero. She tried to blow-off her strong views as a "pipsqueak... working for an 80-year-old giant in the law, and a person who, let us be frank, had very strong jurisprudential and legal views."
Sounds like someone trying to sweep something under the rug and doing a slight of hand, finger-pointing blame game, to me.