Friday, June 11, 2010
There's such a buzzing noise in the "pro-life" community right now about the horrors of Obama's supreme court nominee, Elena Kagan. Surprise, surprise, she's being called a lefty pinko. The commotion would be twice as much fun to watch if there were any truth to the concerns for her "radical stance." You can read some of the recent commotion here and here and here.
She's clearly a moderate, in the pre-Clinton sense of the word. I fear that any of her reluctance to regulate social services for women and the elderly are probably a libertarian streak more so than a human rights one; you know, personal liberty and freedom and all that (read the Montana state constitution, written in the 70s for a fine example.) But opponents of this administration and of the Democratic party (of which I am often finding myself lately, though from another direction) have been running off into the crazy fields of "radical," "activist," "communist," "fascist" claims regarding anything left of, say, George W. It's some sort of conspiracy, paranoid delusion that's again taken hold of the country; unfortunately, not a novel phenomenon.
Kagan's positions on abortion and assisted suicide are what have the "pro-lifers" up in arms. Yet, little is mentioned about her hands-off stance regarding consumer safety and corporate regulation. And because she's been nominated by Obama and served in Clinton's administration, liberals and/or progressives have been reticent to vocalize their opposition.
I expect it will be a contentious nomination process, though if the Republicans are smart, they'll keep doing what they're doing: pretending that moderates look like radicals. The Dems cans seem to cope with all the confusion.