Elena Kagan: Not just another pretty face

We were surprised to find our gut reaction to President Obama's SCOTUS pick Elena Kagan way over in the plus column. We'd been horrified, of course, at some of the things she was reported to have written and said, especially her feeling "sad" at "socialism's decline." What IS it with these brilliant types that they don't get the Darwinian gag response of human beings to being corraled into legislative imperatives designed to force them into acting against their own self-interest? But back to our gut response. Alive, in person at the President's announcement presser she came across as sweet and authentic. Lots of folks twittering about her looks. Understandable, but aren't we sbosed to be beyond that?

Beyond sniping about looks and sexual preferences, as we twittered this morning, we'd love to have a debate between Liz Cheney and Elena Kagan on the meaning for our times and all times of the United States Constitution.

Update: Dan Riehl links:

Dont tell Sissy Willis, she'll be terribly upset.

Crossposted at Liberty Pundits.

Comments

[Gayle Miller]

At least she combs her doggone hair. Sotomayor always looks like she just rolled out of bed!

Grooming IS important - it says a lot about a person's view of themselves and their orderly mental processes!

[goomp]

The problem is how to define intelligence. Generally it is measured by the ability to read, listen and remember. What is most overlooked is the ability to draw conclusions from what we learn. People with mainly academic achievement often lack the ability to draw conclusions about what makes a successful society. They miss the part that freedom of opportunity played in making ours the most successful and fail to understand that lack of such freedom causes Socialistic society to wither.

[Teresa]

When looking at those in public office the only thing I'm concerned about is: What is their stance on the issues that will effect me?

I consider stories about "looks" to be misdirection (no matter which side of the aisle). It means the person writing/talking is unable to craft a good argument to refute the opinion of their particular nemesis and must resort to attacks against physical features.

In my book this is an automatic FAIL and I immediately relegate the argument to the trash.

[Gayle Miller]

I am more than happy to attack Kagan's opposition to the military and her rather asinine arguments in interdicting recruitment at Harvard - but I do believe absolutely that a person's cleanliness and tidiness (combed hair, brushed teeth, clean clothing) are a clear indicator of mental orderliness and tidiness and thus, of some import. My late father always defined good manners as not making your fellow man or woman hurl! My late father was a pretty basic fellow. My late mother believed that having sufficient self-respect to present yourself to the world in cleanliness and order was an essential to being worthwhile. While I don't necessarily always buy into that, I do accept her reasoning pretty completely. I know many people whose exterior reflects their interior struggles and disorder. Kagan is a tidy human being; Sotomayor is not. It's an indicator, not the whole package, Teresa. Then you can go on to the issues that affect you. I was raised by people with very high standards who saddled me with a godmother who believed likewise. She was a high school English teacher who sent my letters from camp back corrected! And thanks to her, I learned!

[Furniture Quest]

Think we can accept that Elena Kagan is an ugly bull dike. But a commie pinko dike? NEVER!

[Teresa]

Gayle, I was looking more at the people who criticize based on physical appearance of a basic nature. For instance the one that springs instantly to mind... the criticism of Hillary based on her weight or hair style.

I have a whole bunch of issues with Hillary and her politics - so I loathe it when people try to make it about whether she wears a dress or pant suit... then do a detailed critique of her "fat ankles" when she does wear a dress. Or tell us her hair looks hideous then can't stand it if she styles it differently. Sheesh! She is clean and neatly groomed from what I can tell - let's then stick to politics.

It looks as if critiques of Kagan are going in that general direction - which is a huge mistake as far as I'm concerned... although I've only seen a few pics of Kagan so maybe she is a slob and I don't know it. Heh.

Since I have never even seen a picture of Sotomayer I have no idea whether she is neat or slovenly I therefore can't comment - although I'll take your word for it. ;-)

[Loiseller]

I'm sorry, Sissy, but she is an ugly mutt... and a Socialist to boot.