Kagan in Context: Shafting Progressive Values

by: Norman Solomon, t r u t h o u t | Op-Ed

Kagan in Context: Shafting Progressive Values
President Barack Obama has nominated Elena Kagan to replace John Paul Stevens in the Supreme Court. (Photo: arcticpenguin)

If President Obama has his way, Elena Kagan will replace John Paul Stevens - and the Supreme Court will move rightward. The nomination is very disturbing, especially because it's part of a pattern. The White House is in the grip of conventional centrist wisdom. Grim results stretch from Afghanistan to the Gulf of Mexico to communities across the USA.

"It turns out, by the way, that oil rigs today generally don't cause spills," President Obama said in support of offshore oil drilling, less than three weeks before the April 20 blowout in the Gulf. "They are technologically very advanced."

On numerous policy fronts, such conformity to a centrist baseline has smothered hopes for moving this country in a progressive direction. Now, the president has taken a step that jeopardizes civil liberties and other basic constitutional principles.

"During the course of her Senate confirmation hearings as Solicitor General, Kagan explicitly endorsed the Bush administration's bogus category of 'enemy combatant,' whose implementation has been a war crime in its own right," University of Illinois law Professor Francis Boyle noted last month. "Now, in her current job as U.S. Solicitor General, Kagan is quarterbacking the continuation of the Bush administration's illegal and unconstitutional positions in U.S. federal court litigation around the country, including in the U.S. Supreme Court."

Boyle added: "Kagan has said 'I love the Federalist Society.' This is a right-wing group; almost all of the Bush administration lawyers responsible for its war and torture memos are members of the Federalist Society."

The departing Justice Stevens was a defender of civil liberties. Unless the Senate refuses to approve Kagan for the Supreme Court, the nation's top court is very likely to become more hostile to civil liberties and less inclined to put limits on presidential power.

Here is yet another clear indication that progressives must mobilize to challenge the White House on matters of principle. Otherwise, history will judge us harshly - and it should.

For more than 15 months, evidence has mounted that President Obama routinely combines progressive rhetoric with contrary actions. As one bad decision after another has emanated from the Oval Office, some progressives have favored denial - even though, if the name "Bush" or "McCain" had been attached to the same presidential policies, the same progressives would have been screaming bloody murder.

But enabling bad policies, with silent acquiescence or anemic dissent, encourages more of them. At this point, progressive groups and individuals who pretend that Obama's policies merely need a few tweaks, or just suffer from a few anomalous deficiencies, are whistling past a political graveyard.

At the same time, with less than six months to go before Election Day, there are very real prospects of a big Republican victory that could shift majority control of Congress. Progressives have a huge stake in averting a GOP takeover on Capitol Hill.

The corporate-military centrism of the Obama administration has demoralized and demobilized the Democratic Party's largely progressive base - the same base that swept Nancy Pelosi into the House speaker's office and then Barack Obama into the White House. National polls now show Democrats to be much less enthusiastic about voting in November than their Republican counterparts.

The conventional political wisdom (about as accurate as the claim that "oil rigs today generally don't cause spills") is that when a Democratic president moves rightward, his party gains strength against Republicans. But Democrats reaped the whirlwind of that pseudo-logic in 1994 - after President Clinton shafted much of the Democratic base by pushing through the corporate NAFTA trade pact against the wishes of labor, environmental and human rights constituencies. That's how Newt Gingrich and other right-wing zealots got to run Congress starting in January 1995.

For progressives, giving the Obama administration one benefit of the doubt after another has not prevented matters from getting worse:

  • At the moment, US troop levels are nearing 100,000 in Afghanistan.
  •  Massive quantities of oil are belching into the Gulf of Mexico.
  •  The White House has signaled de facto acceptance of a high unemployment rate for several more years, while offering weak GOP-lite countermeasures like tax breaks for businesses.
  •  Nuclear power subsidies are getting powerful support from both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue, while meaningful action against global warming is nowhere in sight.
  •  The Justice Department continues to backtrack on civil liberties.

 And, now, if the president's nomination of Kagan is successful, the result will move the Supreme Court to the right.

Progressives should fight the Kagan nomination.

Creative Commons License
This work by Truthout is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 3.0 United States License.





     

»



Norman Solomon is co-chair of the national Healthcare NOT Warfare campaign, launched by Progressive Democrats of America. He is the author of a dozen books including "War Made Easy: How Presidents and Pundits Keep Spinning Us to Death." For more information, go to: www.normansolomon.com.


Comments

This forum is moderated by software. Please allow up to 15 minutes for your comments to go live and avoid posting the same comment multiple times.



When the Supreme Court

When the Supreme Court elected Bush, they thought they were getting a fiscal conservative, an advocate of "small" government and there would be no big foreign wars and nation building. That was what Bush ran his campaign on. The voters who voted for Obama voted for change and got Bush lite. In both instances, the voters got screwed big time. And it continues. Does this sound like democracy to you?



Obama = Bush in blackface

Obama = Bush in blackface



Emanuel-Obama hold

Emanuel-Obama hold progressives in contempt.
We need to prepare a progressive base to vigorously oppose them in 2012.



"For more than 15 months,

"For more than 15 months, evidence has mounted that President Obama routinely combines progressive rhetoric with contrary actions."

Correct. Obama is a most manipulative and deceitful man in regards to his relationship with the progressives, who, for some strange reason, still are eating out of his hands and not waking up.



"The White House is in the

"The White House is in the grip of conventional centrist wisdom." -- Solomon

Which, alas, is because it is in the grip of a conventional centrist. Which Obama, to do him credit, has always made clear that he is -- to those who were willing to take him at his word. (I think that Mr. Solomon has been one of us.) Which is why I refused to vote for him to begin with.

Obama escalates foreign wars -- defunds social programs -- increases the military budget -- appoints rightward -- funds Israel unconditionally -- upholds unitary-executive claims inherited from Clinton and Bush -- pimps for nuclear power, the most economically disastrous energy technology this side of perpetual-motion machines -- re-brands Guantanamo as Baghram -- bails out Wall Street while making cooing noises over the half-dead corpse of Main Street -- campaigns for half-baked healthcare reform with all the passion and eloquence of an overcooked soba noodle --

But brace yourself. It's guaranteed; it's inevitable -- In the next presidential election, we will be told louder than ever that we MUST vote for whatever time-serving Republicrat Lite the Democrats are fronting to run against whatever completely wigged-out lunatic is being fronted by the Republicans.

Or else it's all -- our -- fault!



I'm not going to vote for

I'm not going to vote for someone who doesn't represent and act on progressive values - Republican or Democrat. Obama is losing his progressive base and the under-thirty vote. He going to run on the "I'm not a Republican" platform. Any serious challenge from the left would stand a fairly good chance - but who's that going to be? Kucinich?



The Obama administration

The Obama administration being "centrist", my behind! They are right-wing neolib and neoCON with a "progressive" mask!

This matter, and the debacle in Arizona, points out Obama's two-facedness and his typical (of him) criticism of that which he is secretly, or not so secretly but just not out in the open, in favor of. He and his fellow tyrannous, treasonous and traitorous neoliberals who are destroying this country want all of the states to become corporate-fascist police states, and most citizens to become corporate-fascist enforcers of the police state, in cooperation with the federal corporate-fascist police state, so he can't have it both ways and really be against "right-wingers in progressive's clothing" like Kagan for the Supreme Court, and against state actions that bring about what the tyrannical and traitorous neoliberal, neoCON corporate-fascists including Obama want, while seeking to set it up federally and nationally.

Beware the evil "wolf", Obama, masked in sheep's clothing (and lying, two-faced rhetoric and propaganda) while completely fleecing the republic of all "republic" (sic) values and Constitutional liberty(ies), True Values of a Constitutional Republic and True Liberty(ies) that is!

This matter also points out, even more than ever, as if he hasn't already done so enough previously, that Obama is a neoCON (a neoCONservative for the uninitiated) and globalist in disguise, that he is also a former, so-called "Constitutional law" professor who has a relativistic, tyrannous and traitorous view of the Constitution, and that he is selling out and destroying the United States. He is evil incarnate and personified, and an extremely dangerous enemy to this country, plain and anything but simple.

IMPEACH BARACH H. OBAMA, NOW, FOR BEING A WAR CRIMINAL AND GUILTY OF THAT AND MANY OTHER "HIGH CRIMES" AND IMPEACHABLE OFFENSES!!!!! BECAUSE, SINCE HE IS SUCH A CRIMINAL, IT IS A CONSTITUTIONAL REQUIREMENT TO IMPEACH HIM; IT IS NOT OPTIONAL; AND IT IS OUR DUTY TO DO!!!!!

As I and many of us did with BushCON, send in "do-it-yourself" impeachment memorials according to the instructions of Impeach for Peace at the following website:

www.impeachforpeace.org/



The term "centrist" belies

The term "centrist" belies the fact that the "right" and "left" are artificial distinctions, for both camps thus labeled defer to an oligarchical agenda that dominates policy and legislation. One must drop this language of "right" vs. "left," "liberal" vs. "conservative" -- "A difference to be a difference has to make a difference" (Quine?) -- and start talking about fundamental principles ("A frequent recurrence to fundamental principle is essential to liberty and the perpetuity of free government." G. Mason). Artificial boundaries on dialog brought about by this rhetorical chimera lead to unnecessary conflict and poison the forum against meaningful discussion of essential reason and purpose.



I recently attended an

I recently attended an organizing meeting of the OFA.
That's the Organization for America, the new title for the Obama for America.
The spokesperson f the white House, in answer to my question said, "Yes there are pockets of Progressives in E--- and F--- Counties but they have no where else to go.
When I pointed out they an stay home, she promised to get back to me.
I haven't heard from her since.



Attention Spike Lee, movie

Attention Spike Lee, movie director,
Spike, my man, are you still saying:
"Obama! Obama! Obama!"??????
How about a movie somehow based on this
uncle T. becoming the Heritage Foundation's
Trojan Bro number one?????



Well, I'm one progressive

Well, I'm one progressive democrat who _has_, indeed, been screaming bloody murder since the first week of Mr. Obama's reign during which he authorized his first two drone attacks.

My screams grew louder and louder, until the West Point speech. Then I realized no screaming would call him out any more than they did Mr. Bush. Then came the Oslo speech. Good grief, Charlie Brown!

What good is screaming when anybody who _can_ hear you brushes you off as unimportant, immaterial, unaware?



Solid arguments.

Solid arguments.



Well written: "For more than

Well written: "For more than 15 months, evidence has mounted that President Obama routinely combines progressive rhetoric with contrary actions. As one bad decision after another has emanated from the Oval Office, some progressives have favored denial - even though, if the name "Bush" or "McCain" had been attached to the same presidential policies, the same progressives would have been screaming bloody murder."



I call myself a progressive

I call myself a progressive & I call myself a realist. The people posting here don't seem to have much grasp of realism. You can't yank this country to the left after George W. Bush. Obama is trying to govern from the center - but compared to Bush - it's quite to the left. As it is, the Tea Party is preparing lynching squads in response to Obama's policy decisions. I don't agree with all of his decisions - by any means. But I think on the whole they are sensible decisions made with the interest of the country as a whole at heart. The progressive vote may have been key to his election - but he has to govern for the whole country, not just my particular segment.



c'mon it's an april fool's

c'mon it's an april fool's joke. that's patton oswalt.
oh, it's not april?



It isn't hard to see what is

It isn't hard to see what is happening and put the pieces together.

President Obama has been floating the idea of a future law allowing the government to indefinitely detain people in the future for some time.

He has been engaged in talks with Sen. Lindsay Graham (R-SC) to make a deal on just such a law.

There is already a battle going on within the Dept. of Justice on just how broadly such a law could be interpreted and who could be deemed to fall under such a law.

Now, Elena Kagan, the person who at her Solicitor General nomination hearing supported the governments right to indefinitely detain a person is given the nomination to the Supreme Court where such a law will most certainly be heard.

Mark my words, not long after Kagan's confirmation you will start hearing talk on this new indefinite detention law.



I'm for Elena Kagan, as well

I'm for Elena Kagan, as well as for Barack Obama. I am a progressive. And I for one understand that everything that has been ripped apart by GOP since 1980s cannot be put together again by a human being waving a wand.

I am soooo glad GWBush is no longer president...that he wasn't followed by a Sarah Palin or Jim Inhofe or a DeMint or a Coburn. This country is becoming very concentrated with GOP, ultraconsertive ideas....have you read about Teabaggers taking over Utah and Maine GOP state parties?

Folks, we have brain washing going on Big Time in America, right now.

I for one believed Eliot Spitzer when he said (today maybe) that Elena Kagan could get the 'fifth' vote. I think we'd be mighty lucky today to get that...meaning, in contrast to a 5-4 vote that says corporations have 'personhood.'

Get real guys, we can all dream whatever we want to dream, but to save ourselves, we better stick together. The Democratic Party is made up of people who have so many dreams and worthy ideas we keep knocking our own people into mud puddles. To save this country, we better figure out how to stay dry and appreciate how maybe our president has to be who is today, so we can somehow avoid this corporate-ran feudal system-track we've been headed toward since the day Ronald Reagan was sworn in.



Susan, That would be great

Susan,

That would be great if President Obama wasn't pushing every Republican idea that Bush couldn't get passed during his era.

A mandate to buy insurance called reform?

Escalate the war in Afghanistan since Iraqi's are kicking us out?

Moderates that show more conservative ideals than liberal for the supreme court?

The extension of Gitmo to Baghram AB and Illinois?

An actual LAW being pursued that gives government the "legal authority" to imprison people without charge or trial indefinitely?

Name me ONE action President Obama has taken that was LIBERAL.



Susan: Obama has shown no

Susan:

Obama has shown no spark of progressive ideals. He has sold out on every issue. Rahm Emanuel's expressed contempt for progressives as he and Obama met with hospitals and insurers (no single payer advocates, though)to work out a deal to kill any public option--followed up by "bipartisan" theatre tactics--ought to be enough. If it's not, check out his wars, his support of telecom spies, his nukes and his oil drilling.

Why stick with this hollow man, this fraud?



If the Progressives mobilize

If the Progressives mobilize against Kagan they will to that extent increase the probability she is confirmed.



I voted for Obama, but

I voted for Obama, but should he run for re-election in 2012, I'm seriously considering not casting another vote for him. In just about everything he's done so far, he's turned his back on the same progressive base that got him elected to office in the first place, and is kissing the butts of the same people that are waiting to stab him in the back. In my opinion, this guy is really starting to show that he doesn't have the spine to stand up for real progressive values and instead wants to hold hands and sing Kumbaya with the Republicans who can't stand him. Progressives need a real progessive leader, not someone who can talk the talk but can't walk the walk.



I don't think you guys see

I don't think you guys see my point. We all had to suffer immensely thru all those destructive GOP years. Obama along with all of us have to change America's thinking in order to achieve "progressive ideas."

NeoCons have Worked their PLANS to take over this country for Decades and look at all the levels where they have succeeded in dominating the landscape.

This week we've learned that Utah and Maine GOP delegates and platforms are now Radicalized. This means neoconservative Circulatory Systems are Extraordinarily hard at work Outside the RedStates. That means to me...they are smelling impending Success. They've been working on This Plan for decades. Their pieces of the One and Only puzzle are fitting together very nicely.

They have diverted Huge amounts of the National Wealth to "Kingmakers." They know what they are doing.

This National Agenda has First got to Swing back pass the middle. And if WE can't successively do that we are LOST.

I live in the South. Only 33% of my State voted for Obama. Now the Progressives outside the South are Hollering "My Way or I won't vote for Him again."

If someone needs a Transfusion to Survive, are you going to say, "Hey, you didn't vote for me for class officer....you can't have my blood." Obama is Still our Hope for Survival; he's the only gameplayer I know, at this time and place, who can stave off this Encroaching Feudalism in America!"

Where I sit, I'm counting on the long-haul...that is Eight Years for Barack Obama....with my belief system in tact.

I detest those GOP sharpshooters Who only want to destroy America for the likes of KOCH, Massey, Peterson, and BP...and for the Stock Market sharpshooters, and for millions of blind, uninformed sheep who support them and Rush and Sarah. But heaven help us if the Barack Obama Administration gets replaced in 2012 by a GOP neoCon ticket.

And heaven helps us if this time around it's the Progressives who are responsible for the bottom line.



If Prez O is continuing many

If Prez O is continuing many of the odious policies of the illegitimate 'administration'--and he is--then what's the difference if the gop gains in the midterm elections? Obviously O does not have the conviction or the courage to nominate any true progressive as he feels, probably correctly, that anyone left of center will support him by default. (the old, 'vote for us, we're not republicans!') It's pretty clear at this point that the only governance that is acceptable to the ruling elite is fealty to the MIC. No one who would actually change that will be allowed anywhere near the Oval Office, be it Kucinich, Nader, Paul, or George Washington.



There's a pattern to what's

There's a pattern to what's happening, and that pattern isn't pretty. Our ruling elite obviously think that the tools for social "lockdown" need to be firmly in place, and soon. This is why habeas is out the window, and why Haliburton has built all those nice vacation camps. Places to put dissidents, indefinitely and legally.

The burning question is: "Why? What's the rush?"

Do they know something about climate change, or peak oil that we don't? Is it just the usual greed, now generally rebuffed by the countries of South America we normally rape now turned inward? Is it just a way to "soften" the workforce and get it used to a much lower standard of living to increase profits for the rich?

The Republicans are right about one thing, the government is the problem. They don't work for the people, they work for the rich . . . exclusively, and solely to increase their wealth.



BillyDoc....wealth is a

BillyDoc....wealth is a byproduct...the product to buy the Power....power is the goal. Ruling Class Power.



My guess is...the states who

My guess is...the states who want to raise immense havoc in the Latino communities are making strides to Eliminate the impact of the Latino Vote....i.e. reduce the democratic party counts. They want to disarm that pot just like their Successful attacks on Acorn will reduce new black votes for the democratic party.

These radicalized State GOP state legislative bodies are doing their parts, too. Remember Ohio, Indiana, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Missouri, etc. how close the votes were.

Guess what, the GOP doesn't want them in the Blue Columns Ever Again. What do you think is going on here. Who do you think Obama may be playing to?

Also, I question whether or not we've got a whole group of Successful 'Progressives" posers in our midst on all the progressive blogs!

Did all of you not bleed badly enough thru these past 30 years under Regan, Bush I and Bush II.

What do you need to wake up....eight years of Newt? How about a Inhofe/Coburn Pres and VP Administration. I bet they'd like it. You don't think Koch is paying them for their good looks, do you?



President Obama don't care

President Obama don't care about people.

phoniest politician on the planet

his shilling for conservatives Bennett & Specter should be enough for anybody

this is some real bullshit, folks!



Susan, I hope you're right,

Susan, I hope you're right, but I fear you are not. The sense of desperation present in this power grab belies the "business as usual" part of it. The blatant disregard shown for the Constitution, common law, and treaties of all sorts. I sense a deep fear. As in, "I need to get as much power as I can to protect myself from the coming calamity!"

And, the course we are now on pretty much guarantees a calamity. These actions of the ruling elite are self-fulfilling.



Kagan Involved In 9/11 Cover

Kagan Involved In 9/11 Cover Up

www.infowars.com/kagan-involved-in-911-cover-up/



www.infowars.com/kagan-involv

www.infowars.com/kagan-involved-in-911-cover-up/

Kagan Involved In 9/11 Cover Up



I apologize for the "hiccup"

I apologize for the "hiccup" (double-posting) above.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/kagan-disappear-free-speech-if-the-government-deems-it-offensive.html

Kagan: Disappear Free Speech If The Government Deems It Offensive

"President Obama’s Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan is perfect in every way – perfect that is if you think the role of the highest judicial body in the United States is to ban free speech, indefinitely detain Americans without trial, resurrect command and control socialism, while urinating on everything the Constitution stands for."



For any idiots who don't

For any idiots who don't like the word "conspiracy" in the following quote, even if
'only" Osama bin Laden and his "al-CIA-duh"/al Q'aeda comrades were involved in 9/11, it was a conspiracy; so, if you stupidly think huge conspiracies don't exist or happen, please wake up, stop thinking like that, and face that for such a huge endeavor as 9/11 to be successfully carried out as it was against the largest, most sophisticated national defense apparatus in existence in the entire world, the U.S. government's national security apparatus, there had to have been and was a huge conspiracy to carry it out.

"In addition to the attacks on free speech, detainee rights and the close connections to Goldman Sachs, another noteworthy black mark on the record of Elena Kagan, the president’s nominee to the Supreme Court, is that she played a significant part in killing off the efforts of 9/11 victims’ families to bring lawsuits against members of the Saudi Royal family for financial links to the conspiracy."

(See first link-post above regarding the previous quote.)