June 28, 2010 - 09:14 AM

Kagan - Another Election Consequence

by Mike Huckabee

By now, I’m sure you’ve heard that Supreme Court Justice John Stevens is retiring from the Court this summer – and that President Obama has decided to nominate Elena Kagan as Justice Steven’s replacement. 
 
The Senate confirmation hearings begin this week, so you’ll probably be hearing much more about Ms. Kagan. Predictably though, Ms. Kagan is a pick lauded by the left and reviled by the right.
 
Folks, having seen some of her previous positions, comments and causes she fought for, I’m not too happy about her nomination, but here’s political truth that might sting a bit: 
Elections have consequences.
 
When I hear a statement like “Republicans and Democrats are all the same,” I cringe and think of moments in our nation’s history just like this one.
 
Fact is, you can pretty much count on that with a liberal President – you’re going to get universal healthcare, you’re going to get higher taxes, you’re going to get weak foreign policy, you’re going to get a flat refusal to acknowledge the use of the term “terrorist” or “terrorism,” you’re going to get weaker borders and amnesty talk, you’re going to get extreme government spending and you’re going to get a certain level of disregard for the sanctity of marriage and life. 
 
For various reasons, many people don’t view the list above as a negative – and many even try to label them with words having a positive connotation like “progressive.” I don’t think any of the policies or people pushed by this Administration or the Democrats have “progressed” the nation forward at all. 
 
So, when President Obama nominates a liberal for the life-long appointment to the Supreme Court – the highest court in the land – I ask you: “What kind of nominee did you think you’d get?”
 
With a conservative President, you’re going to get strict constructionist judges like Scalia, an Alito or a Roberts – with a liberal President, you’re going to get judges like Sotomayor, a Breyer or eventually maybe a Kagan.  Elections have consequences. 
 
But you can still make a difference because the consequences are not yet certain. 
 
As the hearings heat up this week, your correspondence to Congress should too. Please write, email and call your representatives in Washington and ask them to question Ms. Kagan respectfully, fairly and passionately. However, with a lifetime appointment looming, demand that your Senators ask the tough questions.
 
Ms. Kagan has never been a judge – so many questions will have to be answered. 
 
If you want to make phone calls visit www.CallCongressNow.com
Comment (23 Comments)
Share on Facebook
Send to a friend
AddThis Social Bookmark Button

Comments 1-23 of 23

  • « First
  • Last »

  • Zotta, Greg

    07/10/2010 07:05 AM

    Elections have consequences. I am tired of hearing that phrase. Elections do not give them the right to destroy the country. I have been writing and have called my Senator Kit Bond to have him filibuster her nomination. I have called in to radio shows encouraging everyone that cares about this country and what her nomination would mean to call their Senators requesting them to filibuster her nomination. The Republican leadership needs to take a stand.Sotomayor already showed her true colors when she voted against the second amendment in the Chicago gun case. During her hearings she was pro second amendment.This country does not need Kagan on the Supreme Court.
    Greg Zotta
    Republican Candidate for MO Senate 22

  • Dr. David

    07/05/2010 03:33 PM

    BDS 07/04/2010 02:45 AM. But the question was not "does the Constitution create rights for the people?" The question was whether "the right to bear arms is a God-given right". She wisely decided not to answer that question, because she could have supported her answer with anything other than wishful thinking.

    I completely agree with the content of Rich Lowry's brief essay in your second reference. Jefferson was well read about what classical philosophy had to say about natural law and natural rights, and Lincoln was right to credit Jefferson's genius for saying a lot in a few well chosen words.

  • BDS

    07/04/2010 02:45 AM

    Consensus? Who said anything about consensus or whether Kagan should acknowledge whether one exists? Nor did anyone expect Kagan to enumerate an exhaustive list of natural rights. Setting up and knocking down straw men does not a logical intellect prove, amigo.

    The correct answer is that the Constitution does not create rights for the People. Rather, it assumes that "unalienable rights" are pre-existing, reserves a few explicit rights for the Federal government, then makes clear that all others belong to the People or to the States. Personal Life, Liberty and Property are safeguarded in the Bill of Rights.

    If the trouble with Kagan's response is not clear, then try this:
    http://www.nationalreview.com/bench-memos/230609/kagan-iffy-declaration-independence/carrie-severino

    If you're not troubled that Kagan could not at least acknowledge Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness as natural rights, at a bare minimum, then I cannot help you.

    Here's a bonus on the Declaration. Happy Fourth!
    http://article.nationalreview.com/437501/what-jefferson-wrought/rich-lowry

  • Dr. David

    07/03/2010 02:35 PM

    BDS 07/02/2010 12:30 PM. Legal eagles such as Elena Kagan would be familiar with the views of Aristotle, Aquinas, Hobbes, Locke, Thomas Jefferson and others on natural law and natural rights. She would know that the consensus is that natural laws and rights exist, but that no consensus exists on what those laws are. For example, Jefferson stated in the Declaration of Independence "...that AMONG THESE are the Rights to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness".

    If she was to have responded to Senator Coburn's question with an explicit yes or no, he would have been justified in asking "how do you know that?" She would not have been able to say, just as you would not have been able to say if you were asked the same question. She was, therefore, correct in answering that she would defend the Constitution independent of her personal views about whether the Second Amendment reflects a natural law or not.

    None of this is to endorse or oppose Elena Kagan, only that when you attack someone, you need to be on solid logical ground. To be fair to another person only strengthens your case when you finally decide to oppose her.

  • BDS

    07/02/2010 12:30 PM

    In A Nutshell: Why Kagan Is Unfit

    Kagan will not say whether "unalienable rights" exist or where they come from.

    This, in response to Sen. Coburn's questioning of Kagan on her views of "natural rights," i.e. "unalienable rights."
    http://www.nationalreview.com/bench-memos/230629/re-kagan-declaration-independence/gary-marx

    With people like Kagan on the bench, Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness will be in serious jeopardy. People like her believe that every right of man emanates from the government. What the government giveth, the government may taketh away.

    This alone should serve for instant disqualification and a filibuster of her nomination.

    Please pass this information along, and please call your senators, demanding a filibuster of Kagan.

  • Los Angeles, Mike

    07/01/2010 09:26 PM

    Re: When a Win is a Loss is a Possible Win

    Elena Kagan will only be miserable by taking such a post she is not tempered for at this time and she will in turn make those on the bench suffer for her lack of integrity(taking such a job) and experience and certainly will cause more than not to suffer by her rulings. So how can all turn a loss into a collective win?

    The good news for Elena Kagan is she is still young enough to make up for the training she failed to get in the first half of her adult life to adequately prepare her for the job of justice on the Supreme Court.

    There is time now for the Senate Judiciary Committee to influence a strong“no” vote to the Senate. There is also time for Elena Kagan to step down if she has integrity and if someone in the Committee, like Sen. Sessions and Lyndsay Graham, can strongly recommend that Ms Kagan be sent by the State Department and Defense Department as legal representation to work in courtrooms to defend the basic rights of children, women, and homosexuals in places like Afghanistan. She also should be given the chance to learn about military courts.

    After she gets real experience in defending real basic human rights violations and gains a life-saving respect for the US military who will have to protect her while she tries to do her job at her new assignment with the same devotion she has shown as an aide in the White House and as a dean at Harvard, she just might then be experienced enough to expand her opportunities to possibly be reconsidered for a justice seat, or she just might find she is actually more cut out to serve as president of Harvard or some place like that with a new vision to respect Harvard's old traditions as it goes forward in the 21st century.


  • Hall, Jan

    06/30/2010 08:54 AM

    I find it appalling that Congress would nominate much less confirm for the highest judgeship in our country a person(whether left, right or in the middle) that has no expeience as a judge. The Supreme Court is not a place for on the job training. We already have a president whose lack of experience in running anything is completely destroying this country .

  • BDS

    06/30/2010 06:09 AM

    Kagan manipulated medical science, leading to SCOTUS overturning partial-birth abortion bans!

    This is huge folks! The Republicans do have the votes (41 to 58) to filibuster her nomination if they will stand up and grow a pair! If not for this reason, then for what? Even if they don't have the votes to stop her, they should go down screaming over this! Don't forget: the vast majority of the American people oppose partial-birth abortion and would be disgusted to find out they're about to get a new Supreme who put in the fix to see that the evil procedure was defended as a "right."

    This nomination by the president who believes that if you want a dead baby, then you have a right to a dead baby. It is a documented fact that he voted 3 times in the Illinois senate to allow babies who survive abortions to die abandoned in soiled linen/utility closets! Pro-abortion radical! Two years ago, at Pastor Rick Warren's debate, Obama was asked to cite his favorite scripture, to which he replied: "Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these, ye have done it unto me." Well, Mister President, seeing that the unborn are the very least of these, and seeing what you do to them, what shall we conclude you've done to Jesus? Hmmm?

    Shocking Kagan story here
    http://article.nationalreview.com/437296/kagans-abortion-distortion/shannen-w-coffin

    and here
    http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2010/06/026643.php

    Please call your senators today!!!

  • September Dawn

    06/29/2010 02:46 PM

    HUCKABEE 2012!
    Petraeus VP 2012!

  • Bouchard, Ann

    06/29/2010 09:18 AM

    Well, I didn't vote for Obama. I knew he was liberal. Anyway. We have to go through this, which leads me to what I have to say regarding this nomination of Kagan. In a video interview of Kagen by Senator Lindsay Graham (R-SC)of 2/10/2009 he asked her where battlefields are and he described that wars are also in the hearts and mind besides being on the ground. He made the case of maintaining the 'moral higher ground' in war also. This is the video link: www.youtube.com/watch?v=6WrkINWb8iw&feature=player_embedded.

    There is a war in the United States in the hearts and minds of the people. The war is on the unborn. We need to maintain the 'moral higher ground'.

    Please bear with me while I make my case:

    US Code: Chapter 50A Title 18 Section 1091 Genocide
    Basic Offense.— Whoever, whether in time of peace or in time of war, in a circumstance described in subsection (d) and with the specific intent to destroy, in whole or in substantial part, a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group as such—
    (1) kills members of that group;
    (2) causes serious bodily injury to members of that group;
    (3) causes the permanent impairment of the mental faculties of members of the group through drugs, torture, or similar techniques;
    (4) subjects the group to conditions of life that are intended to cause the physical destruction of the group in whole or in part;
    (5) imposes measures intended to prevent births within the group; or
    (6) transfers by force children of the group to another group

    Reference: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/usc_sec_18_00001091----000-.html


    See (4) and (5) above...

    Essentially, when Supreme Court Justice John Stevens waited until Obama was in office to retire and he did wait (intentionally to prevent births by upholding a law that prevents births) by knowing that Obama would appoint another pro abortion Justice to the Supreme Court. In this sense he "imposed measures to prevent births within a group" (i.e. Americans) according to the US Code for Genocide. This is LEGALIZED GENOCIDE.

    We would never think that our own members of the United States Supreme Court would want to destroy our own people in an act of genocide, but here you have it.

    This is showing us also that our governmental system has really run a muck. Another reality check.

    Ann Bouchard, President
    IMHAWF
    www.imhaw.webs.com
    Jhesus Maria

  • Keen, Brently

    06/28/2010 07:17 PM

    I urge everyone to read and share this article that shows exactly "The Way to Block Kagan"

    http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=36957

    Call your Senators!

  • OLMSTEAD, PAULA

    06/28/2010 06:01 PM

    I had to turn off the hearings today - they are a joke ! No tough questions - just blather! "Are you really a boring person?" Really, come'on now! Huck, if only we could have gotten you for the nomination - I think it would have been a horse race then. REPEAL-REPLACE-RESTORE ! Prayers will help also! Our country needs much - but nothing more than a President who is FOR our country - not beholden to other non-sequitor countries. Face it! Everything he wants will get passed - they have the votes - GOP does not. Very sad day that too many people were asleep at the wheel for the election of this sham of a President.

  • Neufeld, Jerusha

    06/28/2010 05:54 PM

    Sure would be nice to have an intelligent, quick-with-his-words, and Godly former Arkansas governor to upend Obama in 2012 :)
    any takers?!?

  • Dodson, Jane

    06/28/2010 04:28 PM

    I do not think people realize how close the Lord's return is. Even Christians do not act like the appointment of a Supreme Court judge matters, but it definitely does make a difference.Please Pray and call your Representatives and Senators.

  • Walter, Gary

    06/28/2010 03:04 PM

    Can't wait until President Huckabee is making the appointments!

  • Shiebler, Linda

    06/28/2010 12:24 PM

    Hello Deja Vu! Sounds like we are being asked to go ahead and OK this nomination and THEN we will find out what she is all about - remember Pelosi and the Health Care Legislation statement Folks!!

    Tip -No track record other than Ms. PC at Harvard rejecting the very military that has allowed her freedoms.

  • LeDuc, Kevin

    06/28/2010 11:45 AM

    This is the main reason I voted for McCain. Republican pick conservative judges and Democrats pick liberal ones. It is one of the perks of being President. I also believe that unless some major issue arrises that she should be confirmed. But the Democrats and Ted Kennedy did not look at it that way when they were on the outside looking in and as a result we lost one of the best possible judges in Robert Bork.

  • Fritz, Pamela

    06/28/2010 11:02 AM

    I heartily agree with everything said here. I believe that too many people get caught up in what's promised during campaigns and fail to look at the actual record of the candidate. It was plain to me what this country would end up with if Obama was elected and I wasn't wrong. I believe that, if people are more interested in the economy than values, this country will keep going downhill.

  • Zebrowski, Beverly

    06/28/2010 10:35 AM

    Pray, Pray, Pray, 2 chron. 7:14. Politics will not save this country, but God will. Our weapons are not carnal, but mighty for the pulling down of strongholds. This administration has a strong hold on us, let's pull it down. That doesn't mean we don't do our part, contact senators, congressman, send fax's, ect. God's plan will prevail. We may have to go through some stuff in the meantime, but keep praying for an swakening to God for this country. Be blessed.

  • D'Auria, cynthia

    06/28/2010 10:17 AM

    Hello Huck,
    Boy that is really something to think long and hard about...
    I fear what is going to be next in this Administration...I see the USA going down quickly and hap-hazardly
    I am afraid Obama is destroying this country...he shows NO concern about seniors and now he wants to take more from us?? I hope he gets out quickly!

  • McCall, Linda

    06/28/2010 10:15 AM

    Kagan is not a valid nominee for the Supreme Court. It is another slap in America's face, something Obama continues to do...seemingly EVERY day.

  • burns, lee

    06/28/2010 09:56 AM

    when you elect a iffirmative action presedent,you will get these type decisions,we all know he was elected,because of his,race,and not his experince,he is being led,like a puppy on a leash,to the liberal left wing,whitch does not represent the majority of americans,or thier beliefs,we are taking a big hit,with this demo.controlled congress,pushing,his agendas

  • Shy, Julie

    06/28/2010 09:25 AM

    Although my senator or representative done't listen to the people they work for ( by evidence: they voted for the health care even after letters and phone calls asking for a no vote) and since they now have nothing to lose because we voted them off the ballot....I will call, write, e-mail!!!!