Axelrod Calls Kagan Critics ‘Opposition in Search of a Rationale’
EmailABC News' Ariane de Vogue reports:
Senior White House advisor David Axelrod said today that President Obama is "very proud" of his second Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan, and that in the last week she has spent several hours a day fielding questions that might be asked of her at next week’s hearings. She has a "deep and rich" experience in the law and an "appreciation for the proper role that the court plays," he said in a conference call with reporters also joined by White House Counsel Bob Bauer.
Kagan has met with 62 senators from both sides of the aisle since her nomination.
Bauer said that one of the most striking features of the Kagan nomination has been "the breadth of support" she has received from Republicans, including former Solicitor Generals Ted Olson, Kenneth Starr and Paul Clement.
But Axelrod conceded that the hearings will take on a partisan tone. "We think this should be an easy decision for the committee and the Senate. We also live in an extraordinarily polarized political climate," he said. "Therefore we are preparing to make a vigorous case."
Axelrod said that critics of Kagan have been unsuccessful in their attempt to diminish her record. "It’s an opposition in search of a rationale, jumping from one thing to another….I think you see a furious attempt to find some rationale attempt to vote against a nominee who is extraordinarily qualified."
– Ariane de Vogue
Biden Reflects on Grief, Suicidal Thoughts 
Is Congress Sounding Dumber?
Who in their right mind listens to Axelrod?
Isn’t he from Chicago?
Posted by: Noz | June 25, 2010, 2:06 pm 2:06 pm
Kagan doesn’t have much of a judicial track record for anyone to judge. It is easy to be the Monday morning quarterback or sideline cheerleader, but things are a lot tougher when you actually have to make decisions. A judge should know what effect their decisions will have. Ms Kagan’s lack of experience should be questioned.
Posted by: Jeff | June 25, 2010, 2:07 pm 2:07 pm
That can serve as an accurate general description of Republican policy over a broad range of issues right now…opposition to everything in search of a rationale.
Posted by: Skip | June 25, 2010, 2:09 pm 2:09 pm
That can serve as an accurate general description of Republican policy over a broad range of issues right now…opposition to everything in search of a rationale.
Posted by: Skip | Jun 25, 2010 2:09:45 PM
Word.
And speaking of Republicans, a couple of questions: what is up with Bobby Jindal. I hear him being touted a lot by Republicans, but is that solely because he’s been noisy when it comes to complaining about the federal government? I mean the dude was a hypocrite about the stimulus, and now another network has run a fairly damaging piece highlighting the fact that Jindal has the authority to dispatch thousands of National Guard troops to the coast to help with the response, but has chosen not to. (see CBS)
When asked why, Jindal said he’s forbidden from deploying more because it’s up to “the Coast Guard and BP” to “authorize individual tasks.”
Not true! I mean, what IS that? Blatant lie? Complete confusion?
He’s allowed more than 80% of the resources at his disposal to go unused.
Posted by: progressive mama | June 25, 2010, 2:53 pm 2:53 pm
“It’s an opposition in search of a rationale, jumping from one thing to another”
No problem with that – they are the opposition party, their job is to look for reasons she should be opposed. The only problem would be if Republicans abrogate their Constitutional duty and oppose her for inappropriate reasons (or none at all).
Posted by: jhw539 | June 25, 2010, 2:54 pm 2:54 pm
How about this short list:
-her connections to Goldman-Sachs
-with her appointment there will be zero protestants on the court and most all the court will be from the Northeast US (what about “wanting to look like America”)
-her comparison of NRA to KKK
-her refusal to “come out” of the closet or identify herself one way or the other (if you can’t be honest with yourself how can you be honest with others. Also possible blackmail threat)
-her support for anti free speech laws
-her support of “unlimited detention” of suspected terrorists
-her strong stance in support the expansion of Executive branch powers
-another law from elitist Ivy League schools (like the others)…how is that for “diversity”
Posted by: Ed | June 25, 2010, 3:27 pm 3:27 pm
Axelrod said that critics of Kagan have been unsuccessful in their attempt to diminish her record.
Her critics are not trying to diminish her record but trying to get access to her records
Posted by: DJ | June 25, 2010, 5:22 pm 5:22 pm
When you adjudicate based on your “feelings” instead of the rule of law, you have in effect disqualified yourself. Period.
Posted by: CBA | June 25, 2010, 10:57 pm 10:57 pm
I say David Axelrod is ‘Rationale in search of Opposition’. He takes whatever competition is opposing his candidate and tells you why they are wrong for the job – so I guess he knows a lot about the ‘game’.
Posted by: Dontget818 | June 26, 2010, 8:34 am 8:34 am
Posted by: progressive mama | Jun 25, 2010 2:53:33 PM
Leave Bobby Jindal out of this Kagan debate. He is critical of the fed government, because they oppose every step he is trying to do to minimize the oil from coming onshore. But then according to you desk jockies or the Washington elite know more about everything.
Posted by: Lizzie | June 26, 2010, 9:27 am 9:27 am
Kagan’s thesis at Princeton was on the developmentof labor unions in the US in the beginning of the 1900′s.She compared the socialist backed unions versus the communist backed unions.She was perturbed that the communist faction lost the battle.
Posted by: bobmac | June 26, 2010, 6:25 pm 6:25 pm