“Nothing is a better fit for this administration than a blank slate… loyal, seemingly principle-free, (a) careerist who… as the Obama Administration’s lawyer vigorously defending every one of his assertions of extremely broad executive authority.” That heads-up comes from Glenn Greenwald, a hard-left blogger on none other than Salon.com, who happens to a constitutional lawyer.
While more cautious, conservative blogger William Jacobson, a Cornell University law professor warns “because this is a lifetime appointment you want to know what you are getting. She does not have a long history of writing (and) that’s a big problem… there are more unknowns about her than most nominees.”
The she in all this is Elena Kagan, President Obama’s nominee for the U.S. Supreme Court.
Given the Obama Administration is far from conservative or American-traditional, and has been very left in its approach to federal governance, that suggests Greenwald’s statement about Kagan, Obama’s latest nominee, may be a bulls-eye.
How did Elena Kagan get into her current White House assignment and with that close proximity gain his nomination?
Here too another constitutional law professor spills the beans.
Boston College’s Kent Greenfield said about Kagan “… she is far from an outsider… she is in the mainstream of the Democratic establishment.” Let’s be clear. That’s party – not philosophy.
All of which prompts me, and perhaps you too, to pause and go back above to reread the flag warnings of both liberal and conservative bloggers.
On reread, one can more likely conclude that President Obama has indeed sent a stealth nominee to the U. S. Senate. And, he has done so while his party still controls the hearings and process.
There is much for each senator – indeed every American Citizen – to be concerned about with the Kagan nomination including her positions on serious issues such as life, business regulation, and more. But given the flag warnings from both sides of the political spectrum the overriding concern must be protecting the principles addressed in the Declaration of Independence and enumerated in the U.S. Constitution.
That framework as constructed by the founders and clearly defined in our Constitution and Bill of Rights must not be tampered with by politicians, political ideologues or revisionist operators in this or any White House.
It’s happened before. History tells us of the blatant attempt by Franklin D. Roosevelt to “pack the court” in order to get his way in pursuit of so-called progressivism. That heavy-handed approach was more visible to all and, fortunately, the congress back then stopped it.
Today, the American people cannot count on sufficient numbers of senators from both parties to stand up and – for the good of our country and our founding principles – block what arguably seems like a shrewd political selection.
Across our country, too many, too often, have been swayed by party affiliation or political leaning. That must change in order to ensure the highest court in our nation is protected from manipulation. The bottom line is a stealth nominee must not be approved.
Here’s another flag for all Americans: Remember the last time a nominee was short on record.
Richard Olivastro is president of Olivastro Communications, a professional member of the National Speakers Association, and founder of Citizens For Change (www.CFC.us). He can be reached via email: RichOlivastro@gmail.com ; telephone: 877.RichSpeaks. Checkout his blog: www.richardolivastro.com/blog