Monday, May 10, 2010

As Day Breaks

...Not that it's like, actually broken, or even malfunctioning, but still, some mornings ya gotta wonder! I was looking for inspiration and all I found was eejits -- this guy, for example, who thinks Big Gummit is what we need to keep us safe and tuck our widdle selves into bed at night.

Then there's the Prez's first-round draft selection for the Supremes, tough-looking and a bridge-builder by reputation; her judicial notions are something of a mystery but the consensus thus far is that she'd have a move quite a bit to get as far left as Justice Stevens. (Ed R. quite rightly takes me to task, pointing out that most of what even the pundits think they know about her judicial inclinations is conjecture) . So that's just a wait-and-see and may not even be a bad surprise. (Radley Balko points to evidence she's bad news. So much for any happy thoughts).

And those are the big stories of the day -- other than the next try at capping the broken oil well in the Gulf. I wish 'em well in that effort. Darn it, I need that stuff for my car! Save the shrimp for cocktail sauce! Can't we use a few of the zillions of Federal laws to stop up the leak? Surely the Congressional Record and the Code of Federal Regulations are printed on something fluffy and absorbent, aren't they? They couldn't be that blind and improvident, could they?


Oh well.


Ed Rasimus said...

How can you determined a judicial position right or left of Stevens? Kagan has never occupied a judicial bench at any level of our courts. She's been a law prof and solicitor general (which is the prosecutor for the President.)

No judicial opinions in her background. She will be a work-in-progress as she goes through on-job-training for the high court.

Joanna said...

Some days it's "Good morning, Lord!"

Mostly it's "Good Lord, morning."

George said...

Ed has summed it up very well.

I know ... I know ... why am I continuing?

Other than being a died-in-the-wool Democrat, Ms Kagan has no judicial record (not even from those she clerked for). Despite her declared positions on Administrative declarations re: your (former) Constitutional protections, even they can't predict her position as she was merely being a compliant tool of her President.

Upper West Side educated single Jew. Even this Canuck can bet a nickel or two profitably.


Roberta X said...

Assuming she gets in, I shall judge her on actions, not guesswork and prejudice.

Given the chance, people give so many better - and specific -- reasons to dislike them other than their religion or place of abode. It is not as if she would be replacing any stalwart of individual freedom on the Court.

Besides, it could be a real juicy confirmation fight; anytime Congress is bogged down in irrelevant, headline-grabbing BS instead of picking my pocket or restricting my freedom, I'm happy.