On the Elena Kagan nomination to the Supreme Court, the White House has won the initial battle -- the battle over expectations.... Kagan’s qualifications for the court can only be called thin.... She cannot be regarded as a strong nominee, but the White House clearly believes she is a safe nominee.... During a pastel career, Kagan made one neon decision -- to ban military recruiters from the Office of Career Services when she was dean of Harvard Law School, based on her strong opposition to the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy....Standing in the way of military recruiters may seem normal in academic circles, but it will seem radical in much of the country....This may not be enough to derail the Kagan nomination, but it will complicate it.
That's his whole story, basically. He starts out by saying that her record is thin, and her greatest asset is the ease of her nomination. He then proceeds to nitpick this one thing that might make her nomination harder, saying Obama gravely miscalulated but it probably won't derail her nomination.
So 1) Kagan's one virtue - ease of nomination - won't be so easy. (I also think Republicans will make up something if it isn't there, and his one military recruiter thing might very well be on the list, but it hardly matters), and 2) Obama gravely miscalculated, except it won't derail his nomination.
He claimed two things, and then refuted them. What exactly was the point of his post?
0 comments:
Post a Comment