Tag Archives: political

ABC Singles Out ‘Hard-line, Tea Party Conservative,’ Ignores Antics of Florida Democratic Candidate

Good Morning America’s Jon Karl on Tuesday characterized a Republican senatorial candidate in Alaska as a “hard-line, Tea Party conservative” and someone who ” has also been known to attract assault weapon-baring weapon supporters at his political rallies .” He added, “In a recent interview on ABC’s Top Line, [candidate Joe Miller] suggested that unemployment benefits are unconstitutional.” [MP3 audio here .] Karl played a clip of Miller asserting, “The unemployment compensation benefits have got to- first of all, is not constitutionally authorized. I think that’s the first thing that has to be looked at. So, I do not favor their extension.” Yet, Karl and GMA ignored one of the day’s other big primaries, involving Democratic senatorial candidate Jeff Greene. The Florida hopeful has endured gaffes revolving around drugs, strippers and Mike Tyson. But, Karl made no mention of this. And while Miller was at least making a constitutional argument, wouldn’t the colorful, controversial statements by Greene also warrant a mention? Instead, Karl pivoted to the GOP’s primary in Arizona and used more ideological labeling: “Senator John McCain up against another Republican, who has carved a position even further to the right.” A transcript of the August 24 segment, which aired at 7:09am EDT, follows: DAVID MUIR: We’re going to turn to politics this morning. And three states are holding primaries today. And the stakes are high for former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin. She’s not on the ticket. But she is throwing her support behind candidates in the race. And the big question this morning, does that endorsement actually help? Senior congressional correspondent Jonathan Karl now in Washington. John, good morning. JONATHAN KARL: Good morning, David. And today, we’ll see how much political clout Sarah Palin has in her own state. She has taken sides in the Republican Senate primary in Alaska, launching a tough attack against her state’s Republican incumbent senator. It’s momma grizzly versus momma grizzly. Sarah Palin is trying to oust Alaska’s Republican Senator Lisa Murkowsi. Palin has endorsed Murkowski opponent Joe Miller, suggesting that unlike Murkowski, he’s tough enough to take on the President. SARAH PALIN: He’s got the backbone to take on Obama’s radical agenda. By contrast, Lisa Murkowski has voted with the Democrats more than any Republican up for re-election this year. KARL: The race is a test of Palin’s clout in her own backyard. Palin scored some impressive victories earlier this year in the lower 48. Providing critical endorsements to Nikki Haley for governor in South Carolina, and Carly Fiorina for Senate in California. But, lately, Palin’s been on a losing streak. Over the last five weeks, Palin-endorsed candidates have lost in Georgia, Tennessee, Kansas, Colorado and Washington State. Palin’s candidate in Alaska is a hard-line, Tea Party conservative . In a recent interview on ABC’s Top Line, he suggested that unemployment benefits are unconstitutional. JOE MILLER: The unemployment compensation benefits have got to- first of all, is not constitutionally authorized. I think that’s the first thing that has to be looked at. So, I do not favor their extension. KARL: Miller has also been known to attract assault weapon-baring weapon supporters at his political rallies. MUIR: And, Jon, while we’ve been following that race in Alaska, I know you going to be following what’s going on in Arizona, too. Senator John McCain up against another Republican, who has carved a position even further to the right. KARL: That’s right. And this has been a tough challenge FOR john McCain against J.D. Hayworth, a former Republican congressman. McCain has spent a staggering $21 million to fend off this Hayworth challenge. But, also important to point out, David, McCain is yet another Sarah Palin-endorsed candidate. MUIR: $21 Million. More than he spent in any of his Senate campaigns. But, I want to ask you about the stem cell judgment from the federal judge, too, while we have you. It’s going to be the big issue in Washington today. Blocking President Obama’s executive order last year that had expanded embryonic stem cell research. What does that mean for labs this morning? And what was behind the decision. KARL: Well, this is a major decision. Scientists are scrambling to figure out what the implications are. But, it effectively puts an end, at least temporarily, to all federally-funded embryonic stem cell research. It is a temporary injunction, David. The judge said he believes as a lawsuit challenging the Obama policy goes forward, that all federal funding of research must stop because he believes there’s a good chance that the policy will be overturned by the court.

See original here:
ABC Singles Out ‘Hard-line, Tea Party Conservative,’ Ignores Antics of Florida Democratic Candidate

WaPo: Reid Paints Angle as ‘Dangerously Reactionary,’ and That’s ‘Not Especially Difficult Work’

Saturday’s Washington Post put the Harry Reid-Sharron Angle race on the front page with the headline “In a tight spot, Sen. Reid colors his foe ‘wacky,’ reactionary” . Post reporter Amy Gardner makes it all about the attack on Angle, not on Reid’s record: Few places are as aptly named as a divey little bar in southwest Las Vegas called The Hammer.That’s where the campaign brain trust of Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D) unwinds over beer and nachos after long days spent trying to discredit his Republican opponent, former state assemblywoman Sharron Angle. All summer long, Reid’s small army of young, eager staffers has bombarded Nevada voters with unflattering, sometimes distorted allegations about Angle. They have scoured old newspapers, government transcripts and video archives for anything she has said or done that might be turned against her. In television and radio ads, Reid’s aides have tried to create and then exploit perceptions that Angle is a dangerous reactionary. It has not been especially difficult work . Angle, a “tea party” favorite, has said many controversial things in her years as a politician. A conservative who is deeply skeptical of government, she called for a phaseout of Social Security and proposed eliminating the departments of Education and Energy. Most recently, Reid claims to have uncovered information that links Angle to an obscure political movement called Christian Reconstructionism, which holds that government should rule according to biblical law. Why is the Post covering a campaign by the Majority Leader of the Senate entirely focused on laying all his opposition research out on the table? Gardner would only address Reid’s record by underlining he doesn’t want to talk about it: He is gaffe-prone, as when he said recently that he didn’t know “how anyone of Hispanic origin could be a Republican.” And in an anti-incumbent year, Reid has chosen not to run on his credentials as one of Washington’s most powerful politicians. Instead, his campaign strategy has been to use his formidable resources to diminish his opponent rather than to promote himself. This is the Post’s first (and so far only) mention of Reid’s gaffe, plopped in paragraph 8, safely inside the paper on page A-5. There’s no mention of Reid’s gaffes about how Obama won election because he was a “light-skinned black” with “no Negro dialect.” There’s no mention of Reid claiming the war in Iraq was “lost” and the surge accomplished nothing. But the Post is more interested in Reid’s Sharron Angle packets: This month, The Washington Post received a 27-page packet linking Angle to Christian Reconstructionism. Similar material appeared in reports by other news outlets. Within days, newspapers, television stations and political bloggers in Nevada began buzzing about Angle’s ties to this largely unknown conservative movement, which says politicians should follow biblical law and should not separate their Christian beliefs from their secular duties. The Reid packet strongly implies that Christian Reconstructionism is a dangerous secret society intent on turning the United States into a theocracy. This is something of a stretch. At its peak in the 1990s, the Christian Reconstructionist movement was small and mostly ignored. The group’s founder, R.J. Rushdoony, tried to start a political party, but it went nowhere. When Rushdoony died nine years ago, the movement dried up. It is true that some of Angle’s views mirror those of Christian Reconstructionists. She has called government entitlement programs a violation of the First Commandment and has objected to church-state separation. The Reid material also points out that Angle was an early member of the Independent American Party of Nevada, the state’s affiliate of the Constitution Party, which seeks “to restore our government to its Constitutional limits and our law to its Biblical foundations.” Of course, to any group of secular leftists, it’s frightening for any conservative politician to talk about God, regardless of whether the Rushdoony arguments have a scintilla of merit. The Post’s video detailing Reid’s opposition research shows footage of Angle talking to CBN about how God called her to the Senate race, and then includes Reid “tracker” footage of Angle telling some elderly women that the left dominates academe, and the media also bends to the left. Apparently, the Washington Post considers this contention “wacky” and “reactionary” — even as its Harry Reid coverage proves it.

Continued here:
WaPo: Reid Paints Angle as ‘Dangerously Reactionary,’ and That’s ‘Not Especially Difficult Work’

The Political Compass: just how "liberal" are we, anyway?

Scholars & Rogues, an allegedly “liberal” blog, subjects itself to the Political Compass test to see how liberal it really is. Then its writers offer some thoughts and critiques on the PC method, which is better than simple “left v right” thinking, but a far cry from perfect. The Compass is a helpful tool for all of us, though, in that it makes us think a little more critically about what some of our overworked political labels really mean. And don't mean. added by: hoosierdaddy

Spitzer Boosters at Boston Globe Hail Client #9 Show As Sign of CNN’s Stand for ‘Traditional News Values’

Why is The Boston Globe sucking up to CNN? In an unsigned staff editorial on Tuesday , the Globe warned TV critics to “back off” CNN for hiring “fresher voices” like Eliot Spitzer, the disgraced ex-Governor of New York and pseudo-conservative Kathleen Parker. They strangely claimed that somehow Spitzer won’t be partisan, but he will be “candid” — like in his political career?? He’s “forever marred” by his transactional sex, but also a superior host because of it?  Yes, Spitzer will forever be marred by his use of prostitutes, but the demise of his political career has freed him up to be far more candid than the average moonlighting politico. Parker, a voice of common-sense conservatism, is notable for her willingness to break with the GOP herd; in 2008, she wrote that Sarah Palin lacked important qualifications for national office. Another Crossfire this won’t be: Spitzer and Parker will probably be unpredictable and sometimes contrarian. They might even agree on some things — an entirely welcome development. Throwing ideological chum to the partisan masses will always draw ratings, but it rarely leaves viewers better informed. Anyone who thinks Client #9 isn’t going to be a partisan Democrat isn’t watching his recent TV appearances, attacking the GOP as the “party of nihilism.” But the Globe mourns how Fox News and MSNBC are ruining the political culture, while CNN is a PBS-style oasis by comparison: The fate of CNN is of more than casual interest, because it is the lone holdout on cable news promising in-depth reporting and non-ideological analysis. Its rivals, Fox and MSNBC, have chosen to preach to the converted, fueling a culture of outrage and denunciation. Their effects on American political dialogue have been widely noted, and widely condemned. CNN is the best hope for a revival of traditional news values on cable . This is a weird stance coming from the Boston Globe, better known for partisanship that traditional objectivity. Please recall Brent Baker on the April 2009 column by Peter S. Canellos, the paper’s Washington bureau chief, titled ‘ In a Stroke of Brilliance, Obama Defies Easy Caricature .’ A year ago, Baker found an article lamenting anti-Obamacare protesters in “ Foes’ decibels replace debate on healthcare: Protesters’ yells at meetings frustrate Democrats’ push .” Reporter Lisa Wangsness rued: “This summer, the Rockwellian ideal of neighbors gathering to discuss community issues in a neighborly way is gone, replaced by quarrelsome masses hollering questions downloaded from activist websites”. The Globe also loves ABC’s new choice of Christiane Amanpour and her new America-bashing internationalist version of “This Week” on Sunday mornings:  Broadcast TV is far less culpable for the coarsening of public dialogue, but like all media, it has some ingrained bad habits of its own. The broadcast equivalent of the highly ideological cable host is the super-inside political reporter — someone who betrays no opinions but reliably relates the Beltway consensus. It’s a useful perspective, but a limited, almost willfully stunted one.Thus, it was a breath of fresh air to see Christiane Amanpour, the legendary foreign correspondent, move into the anchor chair of ABC’s “This Week,’’ single-handedly broadening the perspective of the Sunday-morning interview shows. Of course, she, too, was swatted down by some capital critics, led by Tom Shales of The Washington Post, for lacking the proper political chops. Spitzer, Parker, and Amanpour represent a legitimate attempt by TV news executives to sell substance and offer fresh perspectives. More than just ratings are riding on their success.

See original here:
Spitzer Boosters at Boston Globe Hail Client #9 Show As Sign of CNN’s Stand for ‘Traditional News Values’

Mel Gibson’s Dad: The Pope is Gay!

Another day, another offensive Gibson rant … this time not by Mel, though! Mel Gibson’s controversial father, Hutton Gibson, told Liberty News Radio that “half the Vatican” is gay and that Pope Benedict XVI is a homosexual too. Asked by Radar Online to confirm those remarks, the elder Gibson, 91, did so and then some, saying: “That is correct – I stand by my statements.” “The Vatican is full of all these child molesters, that is all there is to it.” Hutton Gibson shocked listeners on the Political Cesspool Radio Program with his take on why the Catholic Church has failed to tackle homosexuality. He calls Pope Benedict was “a homosexual” and “a slippery character” involved in a Masonic conspiracy out to destroy the Catholic Church from within. Hutton Gibson is not a huge fan of the Pope. Mel Gibson’s father attends his alternative Catholic Church in Malibu and has so far not spoken about the actor’s alleged abuse of Oksana Grigorieva . This is a rant that gives Mel a run for his money, though. The outspoken critic of the Catholic Church questioned in a 2003 interview how Nazis had disposed of six million bodies during the Holocaust, and claimed that the September 11, 2001, attacks were perpetrated by remote control. Now, Hutton Gibson claims the Catholic Church isn’t fighting the repeal of Proposition 8 “because half of the people there in the Vatican are queer.” “They have not handled the horrible situation in the church. In fact they have fostered it because as I say they are trying to destroy the church.” Asked if he thinks the Pope is gay, Hutton replied, “I certainly do. Why else would he put up with this? He was in charge of stamping it out.”

Go here to read the rest:
Mel Gibson’s Dad: The Pope is Gay!

Web Magazine Accused of Forging Stephen Colbert Interview

It is the kind of story that Stephen Colbert would likely lampoon on his Comedy Central talk show: Online literary magazine reaches out for an interview with a political figure, does not hear back from said political figure, and creates a nine-page interview transcript of an interview with the political figure, hoping that he never finds out. Only this time, the story pits Stephen Colbert as the victim and Wag’s Revue as the accused literary party. Click through for the non-explanation Revue offers its accusers.

See original here:
Web Magazine Accused of Forging Stephen Colbert Interview

Shocker: Geraldo Takes Stand Against Black Panther Leader Over Slave Reparations

Surprises come unexpectedly sometimes. On Fox News Channel’s July 11 broadcast of “Geraldo at Large,” an aggressive host Geraldo Rivera took on chairman of the New Black Panthers, Malik Zulu Shabazz over his political stands. “It is absolutely pathetic, it is so old-fashioned,” Rivera said. “What are you trying to do? Are you trying to be the big, bad nightmare?” Shabazz, leader of the New Black Panther Party (NBPP) rattled off one of his causes, Oscar Grant, but he leveraged him to make a case for reparations. “I’m trying to help Oscar Grant , who was shot down in cold blood by a white cop and I am trying to redeem, I am trying to redeem – put that camera back right over here, I am trying to redeem — and black people who have been lynched, raped or mobbed and have not been given reparations.” Rivera responded to his call. “You insult her memory when you engage in your hateful rhetoric,” Rivera said.  “I think that reparations is just like these welfare programs that have turned a generation into nothing but unproductive people.”

Visit link:
Shocker: Geraldo Takes Stand Against Black Panther Leader Over Slave Reparations

MSNBC Fill-In Host Absurdly Claims Again: Obama a ‘Republican President’

For the second day in a row, liberal talk show host and MSNBC guest anchor Cenk Uygur pushed the outlandish notion that President Obama is a conservative. Filling in on July 7 for Dylan Ratigan on his 4 p.m. show, Uygur exclaimed, “I didn’t realize we voted for a Republican president!” Uygur preceded this statement with a rant on how ridiculous it is for Obama to express concern about the ever-growing deficit when “60 percent of Americans favor additional government spending to create jobs and stimulate the economy.” Uygur and liberal guest Ryan Grimm of “The Huffington Post” could not understand President Obama’s rationale for focusing on deficit concerns. Grimm argued that, “when people say they are concerned about the deficit” they are just really saying that, “they are nervous about the economy. That’s all they mean. So if you solve the economic problems, you’re going to solve the deficit concerns.” Of course, Uygur and Grimm agreed that the only way to improve the economy was for the president to spend more, neglecting the fact that President Obama has already spent some $3.5 trillion in his first year in office, which more than exceeds any other first-year president. If Obama were a truly fiscally responsible statesman, he would recognize that our nation has a spending problem.  However, with unemployment close to double digits, and in need of a scapegoat, the hosts at MSNBC are growing restless, asking, “when will our president stop adopting Republican talking points and start giving us real change instead of pocket change?”

Today Show Marks One Year Anniversary of Palin’s Decision to ‘Cash In’

To mark the one year anniversary of Sarah Palin stepping down from her duties as governor of Alaska, NBC’s Norah O’Donnell, on Friday’s Today show, recounted for viewers what the former vice presidential candidate is doing, namely “cashing in.” Accompanied by a “cha-ching” sound effect O’Donnell ran down Palin’s various TV and book deals. And while O’Donnell also noted Palin has been very effective stumping for GOP candidates in the primaries she was careful to note that the “polarizing” Palin had “limits to her appeal,” as she cited an NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll saying 52 percent view her political endorsements negatively. Along with the poll and TV and book deals, O’Donnell also included “her teenage daughter’s tumultuous relationship with Levi Johnston,” and “her rage” at author Joe McGinnis “who’s moved directly next door to her Wasilla home ” as negatives. How exactly Palin’s “rage” at a writer/stalker moving next door to her family home could be seen as a limit to her appeal wasn’t fully explained. The following is the full segment as it was aired on the July 2 Today show: MATT LAUER: It was a year ago tomorrow that Sarah Palin made the surprise announcement that she was resigning as the governor of Alaska. And a lot has changed in the past 12 months. NBC’s Norah O’Donnell has details on that. Norah, good morning. [On screen headline: “‘Going Rogue’ Sarah Palin, One Year After Resigning As Governor”] NORAH O’DONNELL: A lot has changed. You know she may be the most controversial and polarizing figure in politics today, but she’s also helped elect some new stars in the Republican Party, while at the same time becoming a multi-millionaire. One year ago Sarah Palin shocked everyone, announcing she would resign as governor of Alaska with 18 months still left on her term. SARAH PALIN: It would be apathetic to just kind of hunker down and go with the flow. We’re fishermen. We know that only dead fish go with the flow. PAT BUCHANAN: If Sarah Palin was thinking about being President of the United States, she’s taking a real step backward. O’DONNELL: But if anything, Palin has surged forward. More visible- JAY LENO: Thanks for coming! How are you doing? O’DONNELL: And possibly more influential than ever. PALIN: How is that hopey-changey stuff working out for ya? O’DONNELL: Especially in recent Republican primaries, backing Tea Party candidates across the country and women like South Carolina’s Nikki Haley. PALIN: Nikki had the backbone to vote against taking the Obama stimulus money. O’DONNELL: Her power is fueled but her political action committee with a deep war chest and a vast army of Facebook and Twitter followers. ANNE KORNBLUT, THE WASHINGTON POST: She does still have a very loud megaphone when she tweets, when she’s on Facebook. She still has the power to affect a policy debate when she wants to. O’DONNELL: But there may be limits to her appeal. A new NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll shows that 52 percent see her political endorsements negatively. And for Sarah Palin, the family dramas that captivated America during the campaign have continued. There’s her teenage daughter’s tumultuous relationship with Levi Johnston. PALIN: I hear he goes by the name Ricky Hollywood now. O’DONNELL: Her rage at an author who’s moved directly next door to her Wasilla home, where he’s writing a book about her. JOE MCGINNISS: She has pushed a button and unleashed the hounds of hell and now we’re out there slavering and barking and growling. O’DONNELL OVER “CHA-CHING” SOUND EFFECT: The national fascination with the Palins has not abated and Sarah Palin is cashing in, going from $125,000 a year to an estimated $12 million. There’s her blockbuster bestseller Going Rogue, on that deal, $7 million. Her own TV show on TLC, on that deal, $2 million. And an exclusive contract with Fox News channel, $1 million. And as for her speeches, she makes as much as $100,000 a pop and even those aren’t without controversy. PALIN: Got my water? Do I have my straws? I want my straws. And I want them bent, please. Thank you. At least that’s what I read in some of the lame stream media outlets, is that I was demanding straws. O’DONNELL: Well her next project is a new book called America By Heart. It’s due in November and she is also expected to be out there again on another book tour, Matt. And the crowds come out for her. LAUER: Oh and we continue to talk about her. There’s no question about it. Norah, thanks very much. O’DONNELL: You’re welcome. LAUER: Good to see you.

Continued here:
Today Show Marks One Year Anniversary of Palin’s Decision to ‘Cash In’

Networks Mostly Skip Tense Kagan Exchange Over Abortion Memo, Downplay Hearings

Wednesday’s evening news shows and Thursday’s morning programs continued to minimize or leave out important moments of Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan’s confirmation hearings. ABC’s Good Morning America, for instance, has offered only 67 seconds of coverage over three days. Today and The Early Show each provided a single 10 second news brief on Thursday. It’s not as though the second day of testimony lacked interesting developments. The New York Times on July 1 reported the intense questioning by Senator Orrin Hatch on an abortion memo written by then-Clinton White House Counsel Kagan. Hatch demanded, “Did you write that memo?…But did you write it? Is it your memo?” Kagan’s memo worried that a American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) report on abortion could be a “disaster” for the Clinton administration. None of the morning shows on Thursday mentioned the exchange between Hatch and Kagan. On Wednesday, only CBS’s Evening News raised the subject. Reporter Jan Crawford observed, “But when Senators tried to pin her down on other specific issues, she sidestepped. On whether she helped craft strategies supporting partial-birth abortion-” She then broke off and featured a clip of Hatch grilling. Crawford herself allowed that “over three days, there were plenty of tense and testy moments.” Apparently these examples were not interesting enough for ABC. In addition to only allowing 67 seconds on GMA, World News skipped the hearings completely. NBC’s Nightly News provided a more generalized account of the second day on hearings. Ignoring the abortion issue, correspondent Pete Williams explained that Kagan appeared “to back away from the position she expressed last year on gay marriage.” On another issue, Williams added, “But she very clearly rejected something she once wrote as a student. In a college paper, she had said judges have ‘authority to make social changes,’ power that ‘becomes irresistible.'” Nightly News, as well as the morning shows, also ignored ignored a clip of Kagan telling senators, “I’ve been a Democrat all my life. I’ve worked for two Democratic Presidents, and those are, you know, that’s what my political views are.” Only the Evening News noted the remark.  For more on Kagan’s abortion memo, see a CNSNews.com article on the topic: Three years after ACOG released its statement on partial-birth abortion — that included verbatim the words that had been the handwritten notes in Kagan’s White House files — the Supreme Court issued its opinion in Stenberg v. Carhart, which declared Nebraska’s ban on partial-birth abortion unconstitutional. Justice Stephen Breyer wrote the Court’s decision in the case, quoting verbatim the passage from the ACOG statement on intact dilatation and extraction abortion that had originally appeared in the handwritten notes in Elena Kagan’s files released by the Clinton Presidential Library. Breyer wrote: “The District Court also noted that a select panel of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists concluded that D&X ‘may be the best or most appropriate procedure in a particular circumstance to save the life or preserve the health of a woman.’” “The picture that’s emerging,” says National Right to Life Legislative Director Douglas Johnson, reflecting on Kagan’s Clinton White House files, is that “it appears that Kagan was perhaps the key strategist in blocking enactment of the partial-birth abortion ban act.” Johnson also said he believes that Kagan had “her hands on this from the beginning to the end.” A transcript of the Evening News segment, which aired at on June 30, follows: SCOTT PELLEY: On Capitol Hill today, Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan parried her way through her last day of confirmation hearings. Back in the 1990s when Kagan was an assistant law professor, she complained that such Senate hearings are, quote, “a vapid and hollow charade” because the nominees refuse to say anything of substance. Oh, how things change when you’re sitting in the witness chair. Here’s our chief legal correspondent Jan Crawford. JAN CRAWFORD: Over three days, there were plenty of tense and testy moments. SENATOR JON KYL (R-AZ): I absolutely disagree with you about that. SENATOR ARLEN SPECTER (D-PA): Apparently I’m not going to get an answer there, either. CRAWFORD: She defended her record on military recruiting at Harvard. SENATOR JON CORNYN (R-TX): It strikes me that the sole result and impact was to stigmatize the United States military on the campus. ELENA KAGAN: It certainly was not to stigmatize the military. And every time I talked about this policy and many times besides I talked about the honor I had for the military. CRAWFORD: But when Senators tried to pin her down on other specific issues, she sidestepped. On whether she helped craft strategies supporting partial-birth abortion. SENATOR ORRIN HATCH (R-UT): Did you write that memo? KAGAN: Senator, with respect, I don’t think that that’s what happened. HATCH: But did you write it? Is it your memo? KAGAN: The document is certainly in my handwriting. CRAWFORD: On gay marriage. SENATOR CHARLES GRASSLEY (R-IA): Do you believe that marriage is a question reserved for the states to decide? KAGAN: There is, of course, a case coming down the road, and I want to be extremely careful about this question. CRAWFORD: But on some things, Kagan was blunt. KAGAN: I’ve been a Democrat all my life. I’ve worked for two Democratic Presidents, and those are, you know, that’s what my political views are. SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM (R-SC): And would you consider your political views progressive? KAGAN: My political views are generally progressive, generally- CRAWFORD: She also showed real savvy, deftly deflecting Democrats’ criticisms of the Roberts court. KAGAN: I’m not agreeing to your characterizations of the current court. I think that that would be inappropriate for me to do- SENATOR SHELDON WHITEHOUSE (D-RI): I understand that. KAGAN: -and I’m sure that everybody up there is acting in good faith. CRAWFORD: And mixed with the serious exchanges was humor, something nominees typically are cautioned to avoid in case a joke backfires. SENATOR TOM COBURN (R-OK): I’m 12 or 13 years older than you. KAGAN: Maybe not after this hearing. COBURN: No, I’m sure I’m older. GRAHAM: Where are you at on Christmas Day? KAGAN: You know, like all Jews, I was probably at a Chinese restaurant. (AUDIENCE LAUGHTER) CRAWFORD: But without a misstep, Kagan seemed headed for easy confirmation. SENATOR DIANNE FEINSTEIN (D-CA): If you were confirmed – and I believe you’re going to be- CRAWFORD: One reason Republicans are unlikely to put up a fight is that she’s replacing a liberal. She won’t change the balance of the court. GRAHAM: So I wish you well and I know your family is proud of you and I think you’ve acquitted yourself very well. CRAWFORD: So is this a charade, Scott? Well, even Kagan herself admitted there’s no real upside to answering specific questions. It’s a successful strategy not to, and it looks like it’s going to work in her case as well.

Read more here:
Networks Mostly Skip Tense Kagan Exchange Over Abortion Memo, Downplay Hearings