Kagan roundup
Obama and Kagan, whispering in the faculty lounge.
Does Kagan have that common touch?
Kagan was no pushover as a prof.
And Kagan is not gay, say friends. Not that there’s anything wrong with that.
The following qualifies as the single most humorous quote connected with Kagan’s sexual orientation. One of her best friends during her undergraduate days at Princeton was none other than the definitely-not-gay Eliot Spitzer, who weighs in on the Kagan matter:
“I did not go out with her, but other guys did,” he said in an email Tuesday night. “I don’t think it is my place to say more.”
[ADDENDUM: Jules Crittenden has more.]
Of all my concerns about Kagan, Gay, not gay is not even among them.
We just elected a gay mayor, and this conservative city couldn’t care less about that
See the following post for the real priorities…
Houston elects fiscally conservative mayor
One other “open your eyes” item which caught my eye in the About Annise page:“the city’s $20 million Rainy Day Fund”. What fiscal truth does Houston know, yet NYC, Boston, Chicago, and LA do not? This is not a tricky question.
–
I find the Eliot Spitzer commentary to be hilarious, but that’s neither here nor there.
I also find it interesting that last month the White House went to the trouble of denying that Kagan is gay. Thought it was supposed to be irrelevant! Also, there was some talk on the morning news shows today about how the Wall Street Journal just ran a photo of Kagan playing…softball. Much discussion about the possible nefarious intent of the WSJ in running that photo.
“The reason this is a rumor in the first place is that many members of the Harvard community who knew Kagan while she was the dean of the law school there really do believe Kagan to be gay, and to have a partner. Because of that, this story isn’t going away.”
http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2010/04/cbs_news_reprimanded_by_white.html
It’s so hard to keep up with what matters and what doesn’t matter these days….
CV: I consider Kagan’s gayness or not-gayness to be both irrelevant and uninteresting. But I find the brouhaha around the discussion of her sexual orientation to be more interesting.
Gay or not gay, she does look like a bitch. Or like this woman who ordered massacre at “Branch David” rancho. And some people call her “compassionate”? This is a kind of theoretical “compassion” leading to bloody murder.
Just compare her look with Janet Wood Reno. The same face.
Sergey
I guess you call that scientific logic? It’s all about looks? And because Reno and Kagan don’t look like Vogue models they must be bitches?
Criminey…
I think my own deeply insightful “Barry and Joe Show Their New Nominee the Ropes”
http://americandigest.org/mt-archives/enemies_foreign_domestic/barry_and_joe_show_their.php
is certainly worthy of a place in this shameful pantheon.
Elena Kagan, President Barack Obama’s latest nominee to the Supreme Court, helped protect the Saudi royal family from lawsuits that sought to hold al Qaeda financiers responsible in the wake of the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks.
Whether or not Kagan is gay doesn’t really matter?
It does to those of us who are not cowed by the in your face militant smear merchants smearing anybody with a dissident opinion. It matters to those of us who hold the traditional revelations relevant. And we are in the majority.
This issue, like all the others, will be re-examined and the original prohibition re-valued.
I’m in the midst of reading Kagan’s 1996 University of Chicago Law Review article Private Speech, Public Purpose: The Role of Governmental Motive in First Amendment Doctrine. I have to say she impresses me with her insight and her willingness to challenge conventional legal theories. (No, I’m not a lawyer. Just an informed citizen.)
I think Kagan could end up being an excellent justice whose opinions would surprise many so-called pundits who think they know what she believes or what she might stand for. She seems to be a careful and thorough thinker who does not approach the law searching for a desired outcome.
According to Eugene Volokh, her articles, though few, are among the most frequently quoted articles within the legal community, meaning that her ideas are highly regarded by many scholars on both sides of the fence.
For those who are concerned about the gay factor, William Jacobson points out that Kagan has gone on the record, unequivocally stating, “There is no Constitutional right to gay marriage.”
MDL: No, I call this intuition. Scientific logic is not applicable to human personalities. Intuition is, and no other way to understand humans exists.
“I have to say she impresses me with her insight and her willingness to challenge conventional legal theories.”
If that isn’t the biggest load of B.S!
Conventional legal theories, here, mean pretty much what Scalia and Roberts write, which we
know Kagan challenges.
But on the other hand, her “insight” doesn’t challenge the conventional legal theory about gay marriage, does it?
She huffed and puffed on the military gay issue, she is gay, she is Harvard, but she says, by golly, she says there’s no constitutional right to gay marriage.
So okay everybody, she’s okay!
And your moniker is “antimedia?” Nice try, troll.
On a happier note, I notice that Chuck DeVore is pulling ahead in California for senator as well as Poisner coming from way way behind for governor. Rand Paul in Kentucky is looking GREAT!
In November, this country is going to start to stomp the guts out of the progressives and send that traitor and wannabe banana republic dictator O-sham-a to oblivion.
Shame on you for voting for him, promedia.