1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Elena Kagan nominated to replace Stevens

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by WaylonJennings, Apr 9, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Azrael

    Azrael Well-Known Member

    Re: Can we talk about John Paul Stevens?

    As a tactical matter, though, a White House appointee is going to be introduced very differently than a candidate for public office.

    The only people right now, for example, who need to be sold on Elena Kagan are members of the US Senate.

    I just think that there's a genuine distinction to be drawn between the manner of the roll out for Presidential appointees, and that of party candidates for national office.
     
  2. Re: Can we talk about John Paul Stevens?

    As far as her availability, you mean? I think that's a reasonable distinction. That being said, the "administration of transparency" shields her at its own risk. I don't think the American people particularly enjoy being so explicitly cut out of the process, even if they technically are. I remember that young woman who worked for McCain blasting the Time reporter on "Morning Joe" about how Palin didn't need to answer questions from the press. I felt it was an early turning point of the public sentiment about her.
     
  3. YankeeFan

    YankeeFan Well-Known Member

    Re: Can we talk about John Paul Stevens?

    I'm not saying it's right or wrong, but the difference in the process that candidates for the Presidency & Vice Presidency face vs. that of nominees for the Supreme Court face is really startling.

    A Presidential candidate faces a months long campaign with numerous interviews and debates. They do hundreds or thousands of small face to face campaign events in places like New Hampshire & Iowa.

    But then we don't require, or even ask, a nominee to a co-equal branch of government, who is up for a lifetime appointment to answer simple questions about their judicial philosophy or opinions.

    It was the Couric & Gibson interviews that killed Palin. In a controlled environment she was great.

    A Supreme Court nominee is never forced out of that controlled environment.
     
  4. sportsguydave

    sportsguydave Active Member

    Re: Can we talk about John Paul Stevens?

    WAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!! Like she was the first female vice presidential nominee put through the wringer. Geraldine Ferraro, anyone?

    Sarah Palin was ripped because she was a whining little crybaby who wanted it both ways. She wanted to ride the media spotlight, but she didn't want to have to answer any questions in the process.

    She was a lightweight who was cynically picked by John McCain to pander to the Hillary voters, and the desperate move failed miserably. She was her own worst enemy, which is why she sticks to her natural habitat these days on Fox, where she doesn't have to deal with anything even resembling a tough question.
     
  5. YankeeFan

    YankeeFan Well-Known Member

    Re: Can we talk about John Paul Stevens?

    The Kagan nomination is plenty interesting.

    Let's please not turn this into the 100th Palin thread to get locked.
     
  6. Cousin Oliver

    Cousin Oliver New Member

    Re: Can we talk about John Paul Stevens?

    Same for a Suprem Court judge. When are they ever grilled by a journalist post- or pre-appointment?

    I guess the short answer is: What would be the point? If you answered any semi-controversial questions honestly, it would be grist for some grandstanding Senator or feed the media beast.

    An administration -- any administration -- would be crazy to let them get interviewed in an open environment.
     
  7. Re: Can we talk about John Paul Stevens?

    Right, but it was the "Morning Joe" exchange that put the campaign on red alert that they couldn't shelter her until November.
     
  8. Flying Headbutt

    Flying Headbutt Moderator Staff Member

    http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/09/did-palin-call.html
     
  9. YankeeFan

    YankeeFan Well-Known Member

    Re: Can we talk about John Paul Stevens?

    Yeah, once they're in, there's not much you can do about it if it turns out that they're an idiot.

    And I don't blame this administration -- or any other -- for trying to control the environment.

    If they can get a reliable pick through, why would they risk it? The bigger/biggest fear is that you blow the pick and appoint someone who's not a reliable vote -- a Souter.

    That's what killed Miers. No one on the right cared that she wasn't brilliant. They were worried she wouldn't be a reliable vote.
     
  10. YankeeFan

    YankeeFan Well-Known Member

    And as it turns out, they would have been better off. Either way, they were fucked.

    Eventually, she had to take questions from the press.

    Shit. I have more to say, but then I'd be ignoring my own plea to not turn this into another Palin thread.
     
  11. Ben_Hecht

    Ben_Hecht Active Member

    Which sums up the appointment record of the American Right over the past
    150+ years. If appointees are Big Business toadies and clever, fine.
    But as good or better is anyone who's Roman Hruska-level in intelligence,
    so long as they toe the Gilded Age, we'll-decide-what's-best-for-women line.
    Transparency, indeed . . . and it ain't pretty.
     
  12. Mizzougrad96

    Mizzougrad96 Active Member

    There's no way a Supreme Court nominee should ever be expected to do interviews with the media as part of the process. It would compromise everything and they would essentially have nothing to gain by being honest.

    There's a vetting process and then Congress/Senate has at them.

    I'm curious, how many nominees have not been confirmed in the last 30+ years? I remember Robert Bork and Douglas Ginsburg, from Reagan, but I can't think of any others who didn't make it, although I'm sure I'm forgetting somebody.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page