Althouse: Susan Collins, Olympia Snowe, Lindsey Graham, Richard Lugar, and Judd Gregg.

August 5, 2010

Susan Collins, Olympia Snowe, Lindsey Graham, Richard Lugar, and Judd Gregg.

Republicans who voted for Elena Kagan, who was confirmed by the Senate today, by a vote of 63-37.

The Democrat who voted no was Ben Nelson.

41 comments:

Fen said...: Yup. Republicans can always be counted on to compromise their compromises.

They're like the UN Security Council: casus belli becomes watered-down into sanctions, sanctions watered down into strongly-worded resolutions, and then those resolutions further diminished into a light slap on the wrists.; 8/5/10, 4:17 PM
paul a'barge said...: The two Maine Cupcakes, not surprising. Lindsey Graham, not surprising ... he's been wanting to poke a stick in the eye of traditional SC Republicans over something for some time.

But, Lugar and Gregg? Now, that's pathetic.; 8/5/10, 4:24 PM
G Joubert said...: I guess if we can have 57 states we can also have 110 senators.; 8/5/10, 4:29 PM
As my whimsy leads me.. said...: Has there been a closer confirmation vote? Where does this one rate?

Toy; 8/5/10, 4:29 PM
rhhardin said...: So that's two smart Latinas on the court.; 8/5/10, 4:32 PM
Cedarford said...: Big day for NYC to celebrate! 5 NYC Metro people on SCOTUS.

NYC is America, at least in the eyes of the majority of Justices. And it is totally in keeping with the liberal mantra "diversity is our greatest strength" because what could be more diverse than 5 Justices at a Yankees game?
Or all 9 as alumni attending the very diverse Yale-Harvard Club's joint luncheon of the Ruling Elites.

Is Roberts the only Flyover Country justice, or does Thomas count even being an East Coaster? After all, I have no doubt the NYC contingent considers SC a backwards part of the USA.

Religiously, as NYC and Yale-Harvard are "quite diverse", similarly, 66% of the Court being from 34% of Americans who are Catholic and 33% liberal Jewish from 2.4% of the country must also be "quite diverse"!; 8/5/10, 4:35 PM
Big Mike said...: @Joubert, you beat me to it!; 8/5/10, 4:38 PM
Anonymous said...: At this point who cares - it's all filling bridge chairs on the Titanic.; 8/5/10, 4:39 PM
Unknown said...: We are surprised how?

Fen said...

Yup. Republicans can always be counted on to compromise their compromises.

They're not republicans. They're RINOs.

Big difference.; 8/5/10, 4:43 PM
showbiz111 said...: A truly sad day for the Republic. We have confirmed as a Justice someone who saw nothing wrong with presenting fabricated 'scientific' evidence to SCOTUS to support partial birth abortions. Of course gays have nothing to complain about now that there are three manhating lesbians on the bench. That's a sure fire recipe for affirming the ND Cal gay marriage decision. What can one say about the five stooges? Graham cracker is a RINO whose only claim to fame is sticking it to his party so he can be invited to liberal cocktail parties and be lionized by the NY Slimes.John McCain could tell you how far that will get you in politics. The Banger sisters from Maine natch voted for a northeast socialist. Lugar also is a RINO, but the only vote I'm surprised about is Gregg. When Kagan votes in favor of Obamacare (not recusing herself at all) his buyer's remorse will fall on deaf ears.; 8/5/10, 4:49 PM
Patrick Korten said...: The vote was 63-37, not 63-47. My heart was aflutter there for a moment - 47 no votes would have been quite remarkable.; 8/5/10, 4:56 PM
AllenS said...: This is good news. I'm sure that she will be a yes vote for polygamy.; 8/5/10, 4:56 PM
traditionalguy said...: There are so many good men and women in professions, that it is sad to see persons who have no ethics except " Doing whatever it takes to get a seat on the Court" be an automatic Court pick. Doing whatever it takes to get what you want has become the morality issue of the day. Selling out for whatever you want makes you dangerous to friends and enemies alike; 8/5/10, 5:00 PM
Trooper York said...: RELEASE THE KAGAN!!!!!!!!!; 8/5/10, 5:01 PM
Ann Althouse said...: "I guess if we can have 57 states we can also have 110 senators."

LOL. Typo fixed.; 8/5/10, 5:02 PM
Balfegor said...: Of course gays have nothing to complain about now that there are three manhating lesbians on the bench.

Eh, I think Justice Ginsburg's late husband would have disputed that characterisation. I have no idea whether Sotomayor or Kagan are lesbians, but I don't think there's any evidence that they're really man haters.

The vote was 63-37, not 63-47. My heart was aflutter there for a moment - 47 no votes would have been quite remarkable.

Yes -- I was thinking, "Wow! Lot of crossover votes against!" Then I realised that result would require 55 states.

All that said, I don't see how Kagan is really all that objectionable -- not beyond the pale, at least, though I suspect I will disagree with many of her decisions. But elections do, alas, have consequences, and the President is entitled to his choice.; 8/5/10, 5:04 PM
Anonymous said...: May I recommend that we all again review Solzhenitsyn's prescient 1978 address at Harvard.

He nailed the diagnosis of what's ailing us today.; 8/5/10, 5:16 PM
damikesc said...: Great. We have a Justice who thinks a prosecutor shouldn't be criminally liable for fabricating evidence presented in a trial.

Remember...the Left is for the little people. Honest!; 8/5/10, 5:17 PM
Phil 314 said...: For such a long time when a President won an election he earned the right to nominate anyone who was qualified to serve on SCOTUS.

To the victor belongs the spoils

I guess we've matured from that viewpoint.; 8/5/10, 5:35 PM
Palladian said...: Antonin Scalia was confirmed 98 - 0.

Ruth Bader Ginsburg was confirmed 96 to 3.

Anthony Kennedy was confirmed 97 – 0.

Clarence Thomas was confirmed 52 – 48.

Samuel Alito was confirmed 58 – 42

Something changed somewhere along the line.; 8/5/10, 5:52 PM
Methadras said...: The KAGAN!!! is RELEASED!!!; 8/5/10, 6:16 PM
Methadras said...: Palladian said...

Clarence Thomas was confirmed 52 – 48.

Samuel Alito was confirmed 58 – 42

Something changed somewhere along the line.

Yup. It started with the conservative darkie who liked to joke with his obsessed stalker about pubes on coke cans. From there it was downhill.; 8/5/10, 6:17 PM
Scott said...: "Something changed somewhere along the line. "

Maybe it was when Patrick Leahy and Charles Schumer declared that a justice's ideology was a legitimate consideration for whether or not they would be confirmed.; 8/5/10, 6:18 PM
Scott said...: Ben Nelson must want to be reelected.

Yeah, I saw the movie Judd Greg. Not high art but it held my attention.

wv: stringlu; 8/5/10, 6:24 PM
victoria said...: I say, some Republicans are enlightened. Even if it is only 5. Get off your asses, the rest of you. Not all are living in the dark ages. rhhardin,only 1 latina.

Vicki; 8/5/10, 6:28 PM
Unknown said...: victoria said...

I say, some Republicans are enlightened. Even if it is only 5. Get off your asses, the rest of you. Not all are living in the dark ages. rhhardin,only 1 latina.

Like Artur Seyss-Inquart was an enlightened Dutchman.; 8/5/10, 6:37 PM
Phil 314 said...: say, some Republicans are enlightened. Even if it is only 5. Get off your asses, the rest of you.

And Victoria comes in an reinforces....

partisanship; 8/5/10, 6:57 PM
G Joubert said...: Maybe it was when Patrick Leahy and Charles Schumer declared that a justice's ideology was a legitimate consideration for whether or not they would be confirmed.

The era for that as we now know it started in the summer of 1987 when Bork got Borked, more than 11 years before Chuckie got to the senate.; 8/5/10, 7:27 PM
rcocean said...: I wonder why Lugar, Graham and Gregg vote for her. What votes did they gain by voting for her? None that I can see. All three come from Republican states.

You need to remember that Spector - the former Republican head of the Judicial Committe - voted for Kagan and Sotomeyer. This was the "Republican" beloved by the RNC, John McCain and NR.; 8/5/10, 7:46 PM
Kirby Olson said...: 3 months left for this Congress. They may as well leave a legacy.; 8/5/10, 7:53 PM
Kirby Olson said...: I mean, they may as well leave a reminder of their decision-making prowess.; 8/5/10, 7:54 PM
Matt said...: Scott Brown proves himself to be completely clueless to history. Here is his main reason.

I cannot vote to confirm Elena Kagan. The reason is simple. I believe nominees to the Supreme Court should have previously served on the bench. Lacking that, I look for many years of practical courtroom experience to compensate for the absence of prior judicial experience.

40 Justices who served on the Supreme Court did not have experience on the bench. And
64 Judges who served on the court didn't even attend law school. I think he voted no simply because he already knew the outcome and he wants to set himself up to run for President some day. Just sayin'; 8/5/10, 8:01 PM
Methadras said...: 5 clusterfucks that need to be gone. Yesterday.; 8/5/10, 8:29 PM
dick said...: When you look at her experience as a lawyer, between dismal and none, and her experience as a judge, also none, why was she approved? what does she bring to the court at all? Actually Harriet Miers was more qualified than Kagan. At least she had a successful career as a trial lawyer, president of the state Bar association and had tried cases before the SCOTUS successfully. When Kagan tried a case there even Ginsberg complained that she didn't know what she was doing. And this is who the Dems name to a lifetime career as a judge. Pitiful.; 8/5/10, 8:31 PM
Methadras said...: victoria said...

I say, some Republicans are enlightened. Even if it is only 5. Get off your asses, the rest of you. Not all are living in the dark ages. rhhardin,only 1 latina.

Vicki

Ah, little vicki shines the light of her enigmatic wit upon as all to let us all know what backwards, unenlightened trogs we all are because she lives in California, the west coast, the enlightened coast, the coast of leftard ideological rainbows and unicorns. Where even stupidity such as hers can flourish in the relative protective bosom of other like minded morons. Vicki, vicki, vicki, keep shining that light on us all.

wv = whorse = Well, well, well.; 8/5/10, 8:33 PM
Methadras said...: Well, should we start calling her Justice Quagmire now?; 8/5/10, 8:36 PM
opfor311 said...: Scott,

I'm sure that Ben Nelson wants to be re-elected, but that's almost an impossiblity. I think it is more likely that he realizes that there is no chance that the Democratic party can help him any longer, so he's just doing what he thinks is best.; 8/5/10, 10:11 PM
prairie wind said...: Nelson will vote the right way...as long as the Dems can pass something without him. Schmuck.; 8/5/10, 10:28 PM
Revenant said...: Scott Brown proves himself to be completely clueless to history. Here is his main reason. [...] 40 Justices who served on the Supreme Court did not have experience on the bench.

If other people have done something, you're not allowed to think it is a bad idea. That's the important lesson Matt has shared with us today. For example, 12 out of 44 Presidents owned slaves. So only a person completely clueless to history would make a statement like "I believe the President should be opposed to slavery".; 8/6/10, 1:32 AM
Anthony said...: Maybe it is my view that the president should be given latitude to nominate who he wants, provided that the person is not too annoying and is qualified. For example, I opposed Harriet Meirs, even though she was not annoying, she was not qualified.

If Obama nominated his pals Bill Ayers as Secretary of Reeducation or Bernadette Dohrn as Inquisitor General, I would mind. I woul dnot have chosen his Kagan or Sotomayor, but they are qualified and not going to open up gulags, so I would have voted yes.

(That said, the president does not share my view); 8/6/10, 4:39 AM
Trooper York said...: This is gonna work out about as well as when Ellen Degeneres was approved as a Judge on American Idol.; 8/6/10, 10:59 AM