It’s day two of Elena Kagan’s Supreme Court nomination and the media has yet to find a narrative that might whip up some fake outrage heading into the confirmation process. Borking ain’t easy, it seems.
At first it looked like the major controversy would come from her decision to restrict military recruiters at Harvard Law School during her tenure as dean. As eager as the public is for more Harvard Law graduates in the army, this angle has failed take hold – probably because, as a her predecessor explained in today’s Wall Street Journal, she was completely within her rights to do so.
Then, some outlets thought that Kagan would be held to a severe standard during her confirmation hearings because she wrote a 1995 book review that criticized the confirmation process as a “vapid and hollow charade.” But the vice president’s office was quick to point out that she’s since disavowed that opinion.
If only she’d referred to herself as a “wise Upper-West Sider!”
The most recent pseudo-controversy came from the AP, which revealed Kagan supported an abortion concession as a Clinton White House adviser, a measure also backed by notorious compromiser Rahm Emmanuel. The story enjoyed the top spot at The Daily Beast this morning, and marks what could be the first attempt to discredit a nominee for efforts to bring together disparate views on abortion.
It’s even hard to find an excessively negative quote about Kagan. Mr. Giuliani? “I don’t think she’d be sombody that I would, you know, fight the last mile to try to stop her.”