Does Sestak support Kagan’s positions FOR indefinite detentions without trial and the expansion of battlefield law toward unchecked executive power?

Sestak failed to stand up to Bush and Cheney on issues of accountability. It’s no surprise he would like a pick who favored more executive power.

I hope that Specter will get clarification from Kagan on the important civil right issues surrounding detention and imprisonment without trial.

another specter flip-flop coming in 3…2…1… and it’s laughable to state that sestak failed to stand up to bush, cheney, et al. WHEN AT LEAST SESTAK WAS IN THE OPPOSITION! specter couldn’t get enough love from bush/cheney/rove/santorum in 2004! “i switched parties because i have a better chance to win” says it all about this scumbag specter. ABS

Interesting. Specter appears to be pursuing a kind of strategic ambiguity regarding Kagan: Clearing the way for an eventual flip-flop vote in favor of confirmation, while at the same time framing his opposition in terms compatible with the civil-libertarian critique of her.

Arlen is in something of a bind here; but with one week left in the campaign a relatively arcane issue such as this may not make much difference either way. He could choose to oppose the nomination from the left in a gambit to regain control of the campaign, but I doubt he’d risk creating any perceived distance between himself and the President whose support(ers) he needs. I doubt Specter will make a firm statement of either support or opposition before the primary. Once he loses (and he will) I frankly have no idea how he will vote on this issue, or any other for that matter.

It doesn’t seem to be as much of a left-right issue as it is a procedural/institutional one.

Sen. Specter has always been a zealous guardian of the prerogatives of the Senate. He was wary of her views on executive power and didn’t like the fact that she wasn’t answering questions.

It will be interesting to see how much she actually opens up when it comes to her testimony, especially seeing as she has gone on record as saying that potential Justices should reveal more of her views on legal issues.

Leave it to the Sestak campaign to politicize a Supreme Court nomination. How is Joe “changing the tone” in Washington?

Joe Sestak: just another politician.

I’m shocked, shocked to find that politics is being played with a Supreme Court nomination!

Someone alert Captain Renault. We need to close that place down at once!

The notion that different job requirements could cause Specter to vote to confirm Kagan as a Supreme Court justice, even though he voted against her as solicitor general is so absurd as to be laughable. If anything, confirmation as Supreme Court justice, a lifetime appointment with Article III independence, should require a higher, not lesser, standard. Solicitors General are not independent and serve at the pleasure of the President. Specter’s implicit suggestion betrays the same extreme intellectual dishonesty he exhibited in voting to confirm the lesser qualified and more extreme Clarence Thomas, after having voted against the better qualified and less extreme (but still extreme) Robert Bork

That Specter could have voted against an exceptionally well-qualified nominee like Elana Kagan to be solicitor general, in order to gain right-wing favor, should tell any thinking person all they need to know about Arlen Specter. He is an unprincipled hack.

Bruce Bailey

“I’m shocked, shocked to find that politics is being played with a Supreme Court nomination!

Someone alert Captain Renault. We need to close that place down at once!”

Personally, Bruce, I believe that Inspector Clouseau is the man for the job.

PJ-
Actually, it’s worse for Sestak. He promised to oppose them during his campaign, then once he got “in the opposition”, he helped out Bush/Cheney on a host of key issues.
Don’t think for a second that Sestak didn’t switch/pick parties to “get elected”. When Joe switched, his family switched with him.

Bruce-
I was making fun of Sestak’s hypocrisy about changing how politics is done.

Rob-
Bork was far more extreme that Thomas. If you don’t get that, then no one will take you seriously (in addition to the fact that you won’t post under your full name).
Based on her testimony regarding detentions, I don’t think Kagan is qualified for EITHER position. She’s one of Obama’s rare “bad-picks”.

The facts-Sestak really is “Just Another Politician”-We don’t know much of his record-He lives out of State–He changed party to run for office. Having been an Admiral, he has been in “Politics” all of his working life.

Diano,

Same song, different dance from you. Had Sestak left this alone you would have talked about the missed opportunity and how terrible and inept the campaign is. Instead now you are appalled that he would “politicize” this. You are a silly man. Good thing you only have 2 sides to your mouth.

You got it rplinpa! Diano has been exposed as a political shill for Specter and as having a personal axe to grind with Sestak a long time ago. He is on every board commenting and his arguement lost steam a long time ago. He exposed himself and now serious oberservers of the political process just ignore his comments.

Diano-

You’re so hellbent on criticizing Sestak out of personal spite that your arguments are paper thin at best and, quite frankly, most of the time, laughable.

Just last week some of us pointed out to you that there’s no reason to think Specter would do better against Toomey than Sestak. You casually dismissed those arguments out of hand. Maybe you should have a look at the latest Rasmussen poll (link below). Let me know your preferred address and I’d be happy to send some crow your way.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections2/election_2010/election_2010_senate_elections/pennsylvania/2010_senate_election/election_2010_pennsylvania_senate

I guess none of you caught the Rachael Maddow show last night with guest Glenn Greenwald and the case against Kagan

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/37074824#37074824

Here is his piece from April:
http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/04/13/kagan

and here is his follow up piece from a few days go:
http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/05/08/kagan

lbj-
I don’t put any stock in the Rasmussen poll. It’s a GOP poll and has been consistently off from the other polls this past year.
They conducted their recent polls on May 6th. They contacted only 408 LV for the Specter-Sestak race that is coming up next week, but used 1000 people for polling the November match-up six months from now. That seems kind of odd to me when the primary is more immediately relevant.

Jim F.-
I guess in your mind that every prominent Democrat in the state, and 77% of the state committee, and the majority of the county committee people are all shills too.

Obama has 59 Senators. He’s probably never going to have more than that. He should be picking a strong liberal to balance out Scalia and correct the tilt of the court. Kagan feels like a short-sighted concession to the GOP.

From the NY Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/11/us/politics/11nominees.html

The selection of Solicitor General Elena Kagan to be the nation’s 112th justice extends a quarter-century pattern in which Republican presidents generally install strong conservatives on the Supreme Court while Democratic presidents pick candidates who often disappoint their liberal base….
But much like every other Democratic nominee since the 1960s, she does not fit the profile sought by the left, which hungers for a full-throated counterweight to the court’s conservative leader, Justice Antonin Scalia…
no Democratic nominee since Thurgood Marshall in 1967 has been the sort of outspoken liberal champion that the left craves, while Justice Scalia has been joined by three other solid conservatives in Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel A. Alito Jr. By all accounts, Mr. Obama did not even consider the candidates favored most by the left, like Harold Hongju Koh, his State Department legal adviser, or Pamela S. Karlan, a Stanford Law School professor…
Ms. Kagan addressed the point herself 15 years ago in the University of Chicago Law Review: “Herein lies one of the mysteries of modern confirmation politics: given that the Republican Party has an ambitious judicial agenda and the Democratic Party has next to none, why is the former labeled the party of judicial restraint and the latter the party of judicial activism?”

No Joe no- What state does Joe live in? Where did you come up with that one? Do you have any quack evidence to support your quack claim? Did you find his quack Kenyan Birth Certificate quack? Quick back away from your computer and put the tinfoil back on your head! And who isn’t just another politician- Arlen Specter? You have to put that pipe down before the glass gets too hot and burns your fingers…
Dave- Why are you so quick to defend Arlen, he didn’t use your program either. All you do is blog about Sestak, even on stories that aren’t about Sestak. Its like your life mission, its kind of sad.

Diano….didn’t even read your post…your irrelavant dude..people are on to you…get over it!

Matt-
Maybe “No Joe No” is referring to Sestak’s home in Virginia he’s had for about 12 years. Maybe he heard that in 2006, Joe had to re-register his car with PA plates and take off his Virginia plates. Maybe he heard that Sestak’s wife and kid are in Virginia where the wife works and the kid goes to school. Maybe he knows that Sestak’s wife dropped her PA registration over 3 years ago. (I’ll know in a few days if she re-registered for this election.) Maybe he heard that Joe’s brother is the one living in the Edgmont house.
Hard to say how many different reasons “No Joe No” may have for his statements.

I’m not a “fan” of Arlen’s. But I do feel that he took a real vote of courage to vote for Obama’s stimulus plan and get Collins and Snowe on board. It was political suicide within the GOP, and it saved us from another Great Depression. I also learned about more of his “good votes” than I knew before: stem cells, minimum wage, hate crimes bill, etc.
Did he fold under GOP pressure sometimes? No question. Has Sestak folded to GOP pressure, despite the backing of the Dem majority? No question. Joe can’t be trusted. Arlen is Arlen, and he’s going to be a damn sight better without the GOP pressure.

Besides, if Arlen beats Toomey, every right-winger from Santorum to Rove to Hannity might have a stroke.

Jim-
Add “Off” after your last initial.

I wonder if Sestak has actually ever paid PA state taxes. He lives in Virginia, pays property taxes down there, so as a renter (as he was in Springfield in 2006), he wouldn’t even have those in escrow.

I recall the last PA politician who played games like this was Rick Santorum. In near time, Sestak will join this other illustrious underachiever in the wilds of PA has-beens and leave the governing to the people who actually have the people’s best interests at heart.