Washington (CNN) -- Solicitor General Elena Kagan was easily confirmed Thursday as the next associate justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, completing the 50-year-old native New Yorker's climb to the peak of the American legal profession.
The 63-37 vote was mostly along party lines. Five GOP senators backed Kagan, and only one Democrat -- Sen. Ben Nelson of Nebraska -- opposed her. Republican leaders offered spirited floor opposition to the nominee, but were unable to muster a prolonged delay or filibuster of the vote.
Kagan is set to begin a lifetime position as the nation's 112th justice. She will be sworn into office Saturday afternoon, taking the traditional constitutional and judicial oaths. The newest justice will then be able to assume her court duties immediately.
I guess Elena Kagan is such a blank slate that Republicans have to find others to attack.... even the dearly departed. They were apparently so desperate this week that they dug up a class paper that Kagan wrote decades ago, before she even entered law school. Of course they failed miserably with that effort.
But what annoyed me most was the way that Republican Senators on the Judiciary Committee used Kagan to attack Thurgood Marshall - a giant and American hero. Listen to the highlights of the hearings from last week, where Marshall is repeatedly brought up, attacked and diminished by Republicans. The effort was led by Senators Lindsey Graham, John Kyl, and Jeff Sessions. Their racism was plain to see and it was clear that they were playing to their base - their white Southern audiences back home. By targeting Marshall, they were attacking civil rights, desegregation, and equal justice...all the things he stood for. In their attacks (in front of at least one Marshall family member) they painted Marshall as a radical...as a judicial "activist". Marshall's opinions as a judge -upholding the idea of fairness, equal rights, etc- were out of the mainstream (although there is no evidence of that whatsoever). What they were really criticizing was Marshall's career before he became a judge. They were basically saying that Brown v. Topeka Board of Education was not decided correctly and was a result of Marshall's work as an attorney & agitator, and a result of an activist Supreme Court which overturned years of segregation. They suggested that since racism, esp. Jim Crow, was the law of the land, and was well established, settled law.... someone like Thurgood Marshall was a radical and activist because he came along and stirred things up by daring to challenge what had been legal precedent prior to May 1954. In other words, these Senators were sending the not-so-subtle message that Plessy v. Ferguson, the 1896 case that upheld segregation in schools, should have been allowed to stand as it was settled law. Racist to the core.
Why has the national corporate media allowed this to go almost unchallenged? I saw the segments on MSNBC...but I have not heard much from any other outlet. Unreal.
Senator Al Franken provided a pretty good rebuttal - see video. Besides Al Franken.... few Senators/House members have spoken out against this blatant racism.
This comes on top of efforts by racist jackasses like Glenn Beck who want to hijack the anniversary of the 1963 March on Washington as a way to mock Dr. Martin Luther King and the Civil Rights struggle. Beck says he wants to "restore honor" and dignity to America..... as opposed to MLK, advancements in Civil Rights, and that nigra being elected President.
*** Greed Over Principle Republicans scorn Elena Kagan for being a Jew at Supreme Court nominee hearings.
Supreme Court nominee hearings for Elena Kagan
From Denny: Elena Kagan has conducted herself quite well considering the snake pit into which her short little legs walked. Nonplussed, she sat herself down, practically dangling her legs off the chair, and proceeded to take all comers in the political drama onslaught. The woman is a warrior with a good sense of humor as a character plus.
She basically walked the same talking lines as now Chief Justice Roberts had been instructed to do by his Republican handlers. So, shame on the Republicans if they are fit to be tied angry that she took their lead and mirrored their game plan.
The GOP really looked bad, doing their usual KKK style stomp dance on the head of a woman. The worst came when bigoted South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham repeatedly asked Kagan exactly where she was on Christmas Day when the shoe bomber was caught like it was as important to know like remembering where you were on 9/11.
She looked surprised - and blindsided - as to why he wanted to know that answer. He slouched into his chair, leaning far left onto one elbow, hand propped on his cheek, beady eyes like a crouched snake ready to strike and repeated the question in a smug tone like the Spanish Inquisition, "Just where were you on Christmas Day?" Kagan finally answered, "I guess I was like every other Jew in America, eating Chinese take out." The whole room erupted in laughter.
Sen. Graham had made his point as a conservative so-called Christian: she wasn't in church worshiping Jesus. This man made himself look bad for being so very petty. He also made other Christians look bad.
When you denigrate another person's religion you especially cause others to lose respect for your own religion. Shame on you, Sen. Graham. You are a black eye on the name of Christianity. The whole point of Christianity is to develop love for others. Jesus never said, "Only love those with whom you agree and approve." He just said, "Love." Mr. Graham you have failed that test woefully.
*** THANKS for visiting, feel welcome to drop a comment or opinion, enjoy bookmarking this post on your favorite social site, a big shout out to awesome current subscribers – and if you are new to this blog, please subscribe in a reader or by email updates!
*** Come by for a visit and check out my other blogs:
On this week's episode, Marvin King and Lenny McAllister cover minorities getting the frisk from NYC cops, Arizona's immigration law and civil rights, the anti-incumbent mood in American politics and Elena Kagan's nomination to the Supreme Court.
Kagan talking about Obama during a 2005 Celebration of Black Alumni at Harvard Law School:
I thought for sure that Obama would choose a safe pick for the Supreme Court - someone non-controversial. But it turns out that he took a risk. Kagan is a nominee who is drawing criticism from both Progressives and Conservatives. Kagan's nomination seems to resemble something closer to cronyism than substance....an opportunity for Obama to do something for someone that he knows or has worked with in the past. Not very different from David Axelrod, Rahm Emanuel, Arne Duncan, Valerie Jarrett, etc. Yes, she may be qualified, but if he were interested in choosing someone who did not necessarily have experience on the bench, then there were certainly stronger candidates that he could have chosen. The list of scholars, constitutional lawyers, and those who have both litigation and academic credentials is quite long. Kagan probably falls somewhere near the middle or the bottom of that list. I'm o.k. with a nominee without Judicial experience.... as long as the person is not a politician. But Kagan is probably the closest thing to a politician that Obama could have nominated, without nominating an actual politician. Remember, much of her experience comes from serving in the executive branch.
Critics have been expressing concern about the lack of a paper trail for Kagan...that we don't have much to go on. But I think there is plenty of information available. I, for one, have seen just about all that I need to see in order to raise doubts about this nominee. I am bothered more by the little that we do know about her, as opposed to what we don't know. What bothers me the most is her position on civil liberties. I am not much of a civil liberties critic, but in this case, (and since they seem to be under attack lately) questions should be raised. Kagan is on record agreeing with Bush era policy regarding indefinite detention and enemy combatants. Of course the Bush rules on enemy combatants were thrown together to avoid providing due process and standard criminal trials to those captured in Afghanistan. That may have been a legitimate concern at the time, because there was no functioning Afghan government, Bush didn't want to use the Geneva Convention rules, and didn't want to set up a system through the UN or ICC. Since then, however, Republicans have tried to apply these provisions to militants still captured in Afghanistan and Iraq, those captured in other parts of the world, and terror suspects captured in the U.S. There is a huge difference between what Donald Rumsfeld was trying to do in 2002-2003 and what Republicans are trying to do now.
Kagan appears to believe that military tribunals (which the Federal courts have already determined were unconstitutional under Bush) are sufficient for providing due process. Worse.... Kagan believes that the "battlefield" in the war on terrorism can be anywhere that we decide it is...and anyone picked up on that battlefield could be subject to some sort of alternative due process legal system. (And I thought that the Obama Administration decided to get rid of the term "War on Terror". It looks like he may be ready to resurrect that too.... all for some sort of political expediency). A Supreme Court nominee who is so shaky about fundamental civil liberties and the Constitution should be examined with caution IMO.
Here is her testimony touching on these issues, taken from her 2009 confirmation for Solicitor General:
Her connections to former Bush attorney Jack Goldsmith should also raise some eyebrows. And it may be hard to package Elena Kagan as someone who understands the lives of ordinary Americans when she has worked for the likes of Goldman Sachs in the recent past, although only in an advisory role. She doesn't strike me as a champion of the little guy, and few Supreme Court nominees actually come from the real world and could take on that role anyway. Once Kagan is confirmed, the entire Court will consist of justices with Ivy League University backgrounds.
If Obama was hoping that a lack of a paper trail would make confirmation easier, he may have miscalculated. I don't think Kagan's confirmation will be as easy as the Administration had hoped. But I see no obstacle that would stop her from being confirmed.
With that said.... I am not completely against this nominee.... but I am not for her either. I think that a better choice could have been made. The last time I felt this kind of strong ambivalence about a Supreme Court pick, was when George H. W. Bush nominated Clarence Thomas. I was actually offended by Thomas's pick as a replacement for Thurgood Marshall. But I had the ambivalence too because I felt that if Bush wanted to really pick a highly qualified minority, there were many other more qualified candidates that he could have chosen.
No doubt Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan’s credentials are impressive. She taught at the prestigious University of Chicago Law School, was a lawyer in the Clinton White House, has private practice experience, served as Dean at Harvard Law School and most recently served as Solicitor General, representing the United States in front of the Supreme Court. Even better is that she’s developed a reputation as a consensus builder everywhere she’s gone.
From Denny: Elena Kagan sounds like a good choice for our Supreme Court. It will be interesting to see how the Republicans will mobilize to oppose her since they oppose anything and anyone associated with Democrats and President Obama. Frankly, she should be confirmed easily in the end as she is not controversial.
Kagan is known for her fine legal mind as was Scalia when he ascended to the bench. High or dazzling intelligence is not all we should consider: good character. Justice Scalia proved to be a huge disappointment as all he did was sit in the back pocket of Cheney and Bush, doing their political bidding. Scalia foolishly thought he would become the next Chief Justice and Bush back stabbed him, giving it instead to a much younger and ambitious Roberts (who replaced Sandra Day O'Connor).
What I like about Kagan - and should be a deciding factor for any Supreme Court choice - is that she has good people skills and a positive attitude. The model of the testy aloof grouchy old guy like Kennedy, Scalia and Thomas is wrong on so many levels. Good people skills speak to a much higher emotional intelligence and, frankly, a person with high intellect AND high emotional intelligence is going to do a superior job of critical thinking and wiser decisions. That's what any nation needs in a leader. I'm also a huge fan of setting the Court up to be half female. I would hope the next nominee will be a female African- or Asian-American - and a Protestant to help balance out the Catholics and the Jews. This country is diverse and our government, especially life time appointments, should reflect it.
As to BP spraying chemicals into the oil spill to break it up, we here in Louisiana are very concerned about what is in those chemicals. We find it disturbing that no one at BP is willing to divulge the chemical makeup of the spray. As it is the government passed on the first two BP chemical sprays and finally accepted the third. Yet no one knows what the environmental impact will be from these sprays. Is it me or is this situation going from bad to worse and dumb to dumber?
Announcement of Kagan, Fourth Woman Nominated to Supreme Court
Kagan, 50, is considered one of the finest legal scholars in the country, dazzling both fellow liberal and conservative friends with her intellectual and analytical prowess but also her ability to find consensus among ideological opposites.
"She's a solid, hard working, intelligent, really smart lawyer, who's had an extraordinary amount of experience in the law even though she hasn't been a judge," said Greg Craig, former White House counsel, on "Good Morning America." "Politically, I think she's also as mainstream as they can get..."
Widely admired for her intellectual acumen and administrative ability as dean at Harvard Law School, Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan came to her current job of U.S. solicitor general with one gaping void: She had never argued a case in the Supreme Court — or any other court, for that matter.
At her confirmation hearing, she told skeptical senators that she was not worried, that she was bringing with her "a lifetime of learning and study" in the law — as a teacher and private practitioner, and as a lawyer for the Clinton administration. But not all senators were convinced. Sens. Tom Coburn (R-OK) and Jon Kyl (R-AZ) both said they wouldn't send someone who needed surgery to a doctor who had never operated.
Kagan, however, was unfazed, saying, "Frankly, anyone has some gaps."
In the end, 31 Republican senators voted against her confirmation — and only seven for it. At the time, Kagan was already viewed as a potential Supreme Court nominee, and the vote was viewed as a GOP shot across the bow.
If Kagan is confirmed as a Supreme Court justice, the court, for the first time in its history, will have three women. It would also be the first time the court would have no Protestant justices. Kagan would become the third Jewish justice, and there are six Catholic justices. At age 50, she would also be the youngest justice.
Kagan is no stranger to firsts, having been the first woman to hold her current job as solicitor general, and the first woman to serve as dean of Harvard Law School...
BP sprays more chemicals into Gulf oil leak site to thin it out while crews work to slow flow
A remote-controlled submarine shot a chemical dispersant into the maw of a massive undersea oil leak Monday, further evidence that authorities expect the gusher to keep erupting into the Gulf of Mexico for weeks or more.
Crews using the deep-sea robot attempted to thin the oil — which is rushing up from the seabed at a pace of about 210,000 gallons per day — after getting approval from the Environmental Protection Agency, BP spokesman Mark Proegler told The Associated Press.
The agency had halted two previous rounds of the dispersant to test its potential impact on the environment, and approved a third round of spraying that began early Monday, Proegler said.
The EPA said in a statment the effects of the chemicals were still widely unknown.
BP engineers, casting about after an ice buildup thwarted their plan to siphon off most of the leak using a 100-ton containment box, pushed ahead with other potential short-term solutions, including using a smaller box and injecting the leak with junk to plug it. However, none of these has been tried so deep — about a mile down. Workers were simultaneously drilling a relief well, the solution considered most permanent, but that was to take up to three months.
At least 3.5 million gallons were believed to have leaked since an April 20 drilling rig blast killed 11. If the gusher continues unabated, it would surpass the Exxon Valdez disaster as the nation's worst spill by Father's Day.
The engineers appear to be "trying anything people can think of" to stop the leak, said Ed Overton, a LSU professor of environmental studies.
Back on land, National Guard helicopters ferried loads of 1-ton sandbags to plug gaps in barrier islands that have been lapped at by a sheen of oil. The effort to bolster the islands was meant to safeguard the area's vulnerable wetlands.
Authorities also planned to use south Louisiana's system of locks and levees to release water to help keep the worst of the oil at sea.
"We're trying to save thousands of acres of marsh here in this area, where the shrimp lay their eggs, where the fin fish lay their eggs, where the crabs come in and out," said Chett Chiasson, executive director of the Greater Lafourche Port Commission. "We're trying to save a heritage, a way of life, a culture that we know here in recreational and commercial fishing."
BP — which is responsible for the cleanup — said Monday the spill has cost it $350 million so far for immediate response, containment efforts, commitments to the Gulf Coast states, and settlements and federal costs. The company did not speculate on the final bill, which most analysts expect to run into tens of billions of dollars.
Among plans under consideration for the gusher, BP is looking at cutting the riser pipe, which extends from the well, undersea and using larger piping to bring the gushing oil to a drill ship on the surface, a tactic considered difficult and less desirable because it will increase the flow of oil...
Government Report Warned Underwater 'Blowout Preventers' Might Not Stop Massive Spill
Oil industry insiders are awash in theories about what caused the massive explosion and spill that continued to spoil the Gulf of Mexico Wednesday, but increasingly they are harboring fresh doubts about a once-trusted fail-safe of offshore drilling.
Known as a blowout preventer, or BOP, the five-story-tall, 900,000-pound concrete contraption has always served as a critical backstop for oil rigs. Rig operators believed that if something went wrong, and oil started gushing from an open well, the blowout preventer's giant hydraulic pistons and shears would clamp shut a gushing well.
"I think that's what's bothering everybody," said Randall Luthi, the former director of the U.S. Minerals Management Service, who now serves as president of the National Ocean Industries Association. "Why didn't the blowout preventer work the way it was supposed to work?"
Monday he will resign by September - a dramatic move that eases the way for his Labour Party to stay in power in a possible coalition government with the third-place Liberal Democrats.
Brown said the Labour Party, which came a distant second to the Conservatives in Thursday's national election, would begin a leadership contest to replace him while he focused on talks aimed at breaking Britain's election deadlock.
"As leader of my party I must accept that as a judgment on me," Brown said, referring to Labour's poor showing in the election.
Brown's startling news conference came as the Conservatives, who won the most seats in the election but not a majority in Parliament, were already holding talks with the Liberal Democrats. Lawmakers had said those talks stalled over differences on key issues, including reform of the voting system, a Liberal Democrat demand.
In a statement outside his office at 10 Downing Street, Brown said Liberal Democrat leader Nick Clegg had asked to begin formal coalition talks with the Labour Party and the two could form a center-left alliance.
Clegg had previously said Brown's departure would likely be a condition of any deal with Labour...
Las Vegas Sands Chairman Sheldon Adelson Reported $2.7 Million in Perks, Including Security, a Driver and Reimbursement for Personal Jet Usage
A funny thing happened after the Securities and Exchange Commission tightened up the disclosure requirements on executive perks in 2006: Companies began to scale back dramatically on the personal jet flights, sports tickets and other benefits they used to slip top executives unnoticed.
Las Vegas Sands Chairman Sheldon Adelson must not have gotten the memo. Last year Adelson, worth $9.3 billion by our reckoning, reported $2.7 million in perks, nearly equal to his $2.8 million in pay and bonus. The bennies included $2.45 million for security for himself and family members, $168,812 for a car and driver, and $67,000 in reimbursement for the taxes due on $118,000 in personal aircraft usage. And by "personal", we do mean personal: Adelson charged the company $6.1 million for the use of two 747 jumbo jets he owns through a Bermuda corporation.
Adelson may deserve a pass, since he invested $1 billion in his company to get through a rough period in 2008. And outrageous perks are going out of style at other companies as executives forgo unseemly--now that they have to be disclosed, anyway--benefits in favor of straight cash and stock.
But that doesn't mean the expensive perks are all gone. Forbes joined with Footnoted.org, a Morningstar unit that scours proxy statements (the detailed annual reports on how much top executives were paid) and other SEC documents, to see what kind of goodies were buried in the most recent wave of filings. Despite tightened regulations, rising shareholder activism and an antibusiness climate brought on by the worst economic downturn in a generation, we found plenty of excesses...
Daughter of W.Va. mine explosion victim says Massey offering $3M to each family of 29 killed
Massey Energy Co. is offering $3 million to each of the families of 29 men killed in an explosion at its Upper Big Branch coal mine in West Virginia...
Lena Horne dies at 92; she broke racial barriers as jazz star with the velvety voice
Lena Horne, the enchanting jazz singer and actress known for her plaintive, signature song "Stormy Weather" and for her triumph over the bigotry that allowed her to entertain white audiences but not socialize with them, has died. She was 92.
Her timeless legacy will forever be celebrated as part of the fabric of American popular music, and our deepest sympathies go out to her family, friends, and fans worldwide as we all mourn the loss of one of music's signature voices," Neil Portnow, president and CEO of the Recording Academy, said Monday in a statement.
Horne, whose striking beauty often overshadowed her talent and artistry, was remarkably candid about the underlying reason for her success: "I was unique in that I was a kind of black that white people could accept," she once said. "I was their daydream. I had the worst kind of acceptance because it was never for how great I was or what I contributed. It was because of the way I looked."
In the 1940s, Horne was one of the first black performers hired to sing with a major white band, to play the Copacabana nightclub in New York City and when she signed with MGM, she was among a handful of black actors to have a contract with a major Hollywood studio.
In 1943, MGM Studios loaned her to 20th Century-Fox to play the role of Selina Rogers in the all-black movie musical "Stormy Weather." Her rendition of the title song became a major hit and her most famous tune.
Horne had an impressive musical range, from blues and jazz to the sophistication of Rodgers and Hart in such songs as "The Lady Is a Tramp" and "Bewitched, Bothered and Bewildered." In 1942's "Panama Hattie," her first movie with MGM, she sang Cole Porter's "Just One of Those Things," winning critical acclaim...
*** THANKS for visiting, feel welcome to drop a comment or opinion, enjoy bookmarking this post on your favorite social site, a big shout out to awesome current subscribers – and if you are new to this blog, please subscribe in a reader or by email updates!
