June 30, 2010

Why am I having such a hard time finding a transcript of the Kagan hearings on line?

I want to catch up with what I missed of the hearings, without slogging through all the video — the video is very nicely presented on line at C-Span — and in a form I can cut and paste for blogging purposes. But I can't find a transcript!

Could someone point me to a transcript of the first and second day hearings so before my thoughts come to rest on the theory that the media don't want us to be able to comb through the text?

The text! The text is important when we're talking about the Constitution!


Hoosier Daddy said...

Release the Kagan!

Trooper is right, it never loses its utility.

Bill White said...

The gov't is doing their usual sterling job: http://www.senate.gov/reference/common/faq/how_to_committe_hrg.htm

Published hearing transcripts contain all witness testimony, the question-and-answer portion of the hearing, and any other material requested of the witness by the committee. It takes several months, or even years, for a hearing to be published.

Ann Althouse said...

No one has provided a link yet. Can I conclude there is no transcript on line?

I think I always got transcripts before when there were Supreme Court hearings. Roberts, Alito, Sotomayor -- I blogged all of those and I think I had text. What's going on?

Ann Althouse said...

@ Bill White I'm not talking about the govt's own transcripts, but something that would ordinarily be produced by one of the MSM outlets.

I guess I should look back and see what I used in those other hearings.

I'm Full of Soup said...

Fact embargo is SOP for MSM.

reader_iam said...

Well, what are you going to do when the MSM bites the dust, which it appears is the desired--or at least predicted--outcome, sooner or later?

Do it yourself. Or hire someone. You could have done that, you know. These were scheduled hearings. There are plenty of people who need jobs. Why didn't you arrange to hire someone to transcribe the hearings either live or via video?

Then, you could have published those so that the information--longing to be free--could be free for everyone else! Citizen journalism, baby. It's the wave of the future, and it's going to be EVERYONE'S responsibility, including the "slogging through" work (or paying someone to slog through it).

Step up, folks: The media is YOU! Stop whining and get to work.

TMink said...

"The text! The text is important when we're talking about the Constitution!"

The text is not as important as the intent and penumbra.

Trey /sarcasm=off

reader_iam said...

It's a win, all the way around. Think of all those unemployed law students/law grads with all those loans to pay off! Surely you--and other law profs--know some of those. It'd be a public service AND support the free market AND citizen journalism, not to mention taking responsibility for gathering one's own information in a free society. What's not to love about all of that?

rhhardin said...

Text is the originalist theory of the Kagan hearings.

reader_iam said...

Of course, there are also a fair number of unemployed media types out there, as well, and they might work for less money. The downside is that they're probably tainted on account of they were interested in being journalists at one time. So, the underemployed or unemployed law grad is probably the way to go.

Kirby Olson said...

"I believe that people should be allowed to define themselves."

That's all the text of Kagan's that we really need. It's right out of Judith Butler.

rhhardin said...

Interesting fact, gleaned from trying to transcribe Imus interviews word for word, stumble for stumble, including ah's and um's

It's incredibly hard to do an exact transcription. Speech is not anything like the way it's heard.

You're built precisely not to hear dysfluencies, and getting them down in text in the right order and the right place is unbelievably hard.

It's even hard, once you're done, to verify that the order you have is correct by relistening by following along.

Charlie Martin said...

Because none of the transcriptionists could stay awake?

Chip Ahoy said...

Transcribers keep falling asleep mid sentence. It's a problem.

Chip Ahoy said...

Charlie, you bum, I see you beat me to the crack.

Unknown said...

If people could read her testimony at leisure and have time to reflect on it, they might get the idea she's unqualified.

Hoosier Daddy said...

Release the Kagan!

You release your Kagan. Mine is staying right where it is.

reader_iam said...

rhhardin: It's a skill, all right. Most people who have it don't want to do it for free. Yet there's a cost-benefit analysis in paying for it, based on how much real interest there is out there. It seems to me that those who want it should pay for it, or do the work themselves, not demand it free from somewhere else. I mean, what a sense of entitlement!

reader_iam said...

Anyway, how do you know any transcript produced by the media would be accurate? Quite apart from the time required to transcribe and then--as rhhardin points out--verify the transcription (which even then might not be 100%)--how do you know the text wouldn't be manipulated or cleansed in some way? This is the media, remember, and you know what that means. The truth is, you couldn't know unless you played close attention yourself and did your own checking. Why rely on anyone other than yourself or someone you vetted and hired yourself?

Trooper York said...

The mainstream media has missed a touching story that developed outside of the spotlight. Former Secretary of State Madeline Albright contacted Ms. Kagan to inform her of some information that had come her way. You will recall that Sec. Albright was so misinformed that she didn't know she was Jewish. Well she recently went on the new TV show "Who Do You Think You Are" to research her family tree. And lo and behold it turns out that she is also related to Ms. Kagan. You see no one had informed her that she was adopted after she had been left in a basket in front of the Friar's club. Thus Sec. Albright wants to tell Ms. Kagan about her real father.

Once she knows the truth, I feel confident that she will


A.W. said...


i don't think it exists as of now.

i think you will be forced to actually watch it. jesus wept.

Pastafarian said...

Althouse said: "The text! The text is important when we're talking about the Constitution!"

Has the Constitution come up during this hearing?

Can it?

You can't ask her how she would have ruled on something, or how she will rule on something. God forbid that we know that, before confirming her for life.

The Democrats ask her silly softball questions like "tell us about your parents", and the Republicans dance around the issue trying to get her to affirm that she's a Progressive (and apparently she's unaware of the exact, precise definition of this strange word "progressive", and so she's unable to answer).

At least she didn't say "that depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is", with a shit-eating smirk.

This is a vapid and hollow charade, taking on an air of vacuity and farce.

(That's asshole-ese for bullshit, as uttered by a genuine asshole).

You want a transcript of this? Seriously, what for?

Ann Althouse said...

I want a transcript because it's much faster even to read straight through, but I would skim for the subjects I want to write about and do word searches to find every time something was said or to verify that something was not said. And I would cut and paste text to use to write about what I chose. Video is completely different.

A.W. said...

Ann, agreed. I wasn't trying to imply that a transcript wouldn't be really useful, nor did i mean to suggest it shouldn't be available. I was just trying and failing to say clearly that I had looked for it, and right now it doesn't seem to exist.

which sucks.

And then i made a joke about how awful it would be to watch it all.

AlphaLiberal said...

Answer: box wine

Pastafarian said...

Did you catch this exchange between Sen. Hatch and Kagan? It's about the memo she wrote while part of the Clinton administration, in which she altered the findings of a commission of medical experts on the necessity of partial birth abortion:

“Did you write that memo?” Hatch asked.

“Senator, with respect,” Kagan began, “I don’t think that that’s what happened — ”

“Did you write that memo?”

“I’m sorry — the memo which is?”

“The memo that caused them to go back to the language of ‘medically necessary,’ which was the big issue to begin with — ”

“Yes, well, I’ve seen the document — ”

“But did you write it?”

“The document is certainly in my handwriting.”

Jesus Christ. She won't admit that she wrote it; they fuck around like this for ten minutes, and she finally relents with "well, it's in my handwriting".

And we're going to appoint this Clintonesque lying weasel to a lifetime position making decisions that will impact the freedom of our grandchildren.

Yeah, I'd love a transcript of this. So I could wipe my ass with it. I have nothing but contempt for this process, these people, and this profession that you call "law".

C R Krieger said...

I feel your pain.  I tried to track down the question from Senator Cronyn on the Tenth Amendment and couldn't find it.  And The Boston Globe article mentioned nothing of it.

Regards  —  Cliff

ndmike said...


Search for Kagan on the column to the left. The entry you want is titled “SENATE-HRG-KAGAN-NOM 00.” It appears to be complete.

ndmike said...

Actually, there are two entries with that title. One is June 29, the other is June 30.