Stacy I love ya, you are my friend but that’s not funny any more than a black man dressed in a Klan Robe would be funny.

Ok bad example but it’s still bad form. I know Pam put it up first in context to her critique but I think it’s a real jump here. It will get a lot more attention than this did. Everyone makes mistakes but this one is a doozy.

Glenn Reynolds links to this post at Cato concerning Specter’s questioning of Kagan and dissatisfaction with her answers.

The most memorable part of today’s first session of questioning (9am till after 1pm) was undoubtedly Arlen Specter pressing the nominee to answer questions about various lawsuits of special concern to him … Specter was extremely dissatisfied, to the point where his vote is legitimately in doubt.

Why is this so interesting? Well Specter’s time in the senate will be over in January. He has been rejected by democratic primary voters and no longer needs to please him and can’t and won’t get anything from Republicans. Thus for the first time in decades has absolutely no political skin in the game.

This vote will likely be one of the few times where he will be voting solely on what he actually thinks. I don’t know if anyone really cares but it will be interesting to see.

I was approving comments today and a fellow named Billy asked what I think is a very fair question:

If “Kagan has to stand or fall on her record,” why has every single one of your posts about her been related to her sexual orientation?

It’s a good point worth answering, particularly since I’ve claimed that it has non bearing on her qualifications for the court.

First Two people I like, Robert Stacy McCain and Cynthia Yockey wrote stories on the issue. I thought that Cynthia’s was particularly good and I found it a good reason to link to them. I must not be alone in that opinion since she has been invited on two radio shows since her PJ media piece.

Second: Frankly the Elena Kagan nomination story is… well boring. Very important mind you, will affect the country for decades but boring nonetheless. You have a liberal president with a 59-41 Senate nominating a supreme court nominee. Barring a revelation that she was working secretly for the Taliban there is a greater chance of this president naming me to replace her in the solicitor general’s office than there is of her being defeated. If the Senate was closer it might be different but with these numbers, until the hearing it is just a giant yawner.

Third: We have been told over and over again that republicans and conservatives are “homophobic” and the democratic party is the one place that is welcoming for gays, yet during the course of the year this administration has stuck their finger in the eyes of Gay groups on more than one occasion. Thus how the administration handles the first “Gay” nominee to the court is significant.

Fourth: The reactions themselves have been telling. The suggestion that she is a lesbian is being treated by Democrats and the administration as a slur. This totally contradicts the image the democrats have of themselves as Gay friendly. It is that phoniness that is the only interesting story at this point, at least until the hearing start, then you never know.

Finally: It gave me a chance to quote Andrew Sullivan. For reasons that will be clear in just under three weeks I wanted an excuse to link to and quote Sullivan. This story provided it.

I hope this is an adequate answer to your question.

Gay rights groups are apparently hitting the WSJ over the softball picture.

Pat Buchanan talked about what playing softball meant, I guess I AM a naif, I’ve never ever heard of Softball=lesbian. This is Massachusetts, Baseball and the Red Sox are practically the 8th sacrament.

Oh and Joe agrees with me, I like the batting stance.

I’m looking at the gay rights groups response over that photo, left and right, I say the various groups were waiting for a chance to be “out-raged”

On the left you hear it:

“Personally I think the newspaper, which happens to have the largest circulation of any in the U.S., might as well have gone with a headline that said, ‘Lesbian or switch-hitter?'” grumbled the Dallas Voice’s John Wright.

On the right they are using the photo to hit the administration

“I fully expect the White House to push back and claim Kagan never played softball and that it’s a smear to insinuate she did,” emailed a founder of the conservative gay group GOProud, Chris Barron.

The response of the WSJ was classic and Morning Joe read it:

“If you turn the photo upside down, reverse the pixilation and simultaneously listen to Abbey Road backwards, while reading Roland Barthes, you will indeed find a very subtle hidden message,” said Journal spokeswoman Ashley Huston.

I don’t know what the Journal pays Ashley but she deserves a bonus, that was awesome.

I still never heard a thing about the Softball stuff, I’ll have to take Pat’s word for it, but then again I didn’t see the Spongebob connection either until a gay friend told me either.

Of course there is this report from Dan Riehl

…but I’ve never heard playing softball being a sign of being a lesbian.

If that is the case then there are a bunch of lesbian leagues in Massachusetts that a bunch of guys are playing on.

But between the politico article and Sullivan’s latest I must conclude that this is all about making it a cause, suddenly we have to support her because those nasty conservatives are making hay of her orientation. That way the White House can be only reluctantly dragged into the conversation.

It would be a good plan, except for the fact that the American Media have lost the ability to con the American People that they once had. Kagan has to stand or fall on her record.

She will likely stand.

Update: I actually like the picture in question it is a good baseball stance and there is nothing more American than a person at the plate.

with this article concerning Elena Kagan:

Gossiping about the sexuality of Washington powerbrokers has become sort of a national pastime. But the stakes—and the vitriol—seem to go up substantially when powerful women crash the beltway frat party. And while Sullivan might think that sexual orientation has become as bland a biographical detail as Jewishness, the unfortunate truth is that, unlike him, most of those suggesting Kagan has something to hide aren’t rooting for her to come out so she can advance the cause of gay rights. They just want to knock a powerful woman down a few notches.

I have not nor do I suggest that Elena Kagan’s sexuality disqualifies her for the high court, nor should it. Yet Mother Jones suggests that to be a Lesbian is a slur. Why is that? How is the suggestion that Kagan is a lesbian directing hate to her? I think the very suggestion is a great example of two things.

The first being projection, Mother Jones’ Stephanie Memcimer is quick to play the “homophobia” card but she is the one suggesting Lesbianism is a slur, something to be denied. I guess Cynthia is right when she talks about the left’s true feelings about homosexuals.

The second being the suggestion that the White house plan is to duck the issue until it can be framed as Mother Jones just did. That way it can be the story of: Evil Right Wingers pushing the Kagan’s sexuality as an issue, as opposed to a celebration of the first Lesbian justice. This will give the media a reason to celebrate the diversity without having brought it up themselves first being forced into it. The White House’s cunning plan that I mentioned in play?

Sounds like don’t ask don’t tell to me, but it can’t be because we know Kagan opposes it.

Even funnier than that is this line that really takes the cake:

Just ask John Edwards how hard it is to keep secret relationships secret in the era of 24/7 celebrity coverage.

Is she serious? Does she not recall the successful efforts of the media to totally ignore and deny the John Edwards story until there was no chance of him getting the nomination? This is supposed to be a professional journalist who I am to give credence to? Ha!

Taking another look at Gibbs’ feigned outrage I wonder if the White House plan is to feign outrage in order to make it a moral imperative of “fairness” to rush Kagan through to keep her from improper personal questions.

I certainly don’t care who she is sleeping with but I sure would like to know her Abortion position (as if I didn’t know).

…from my youth.

My mother is a strong willed Sicilian woman who although she had many diplomatic skills was also blunt when asked a direct question. This bluntness made her more than a few enemies.

There is one in particular that comes to mind, I won’t quote the name as the woman in question is long dead but to say there was no love lost between them is the understatement and then some. I’ve heard the stories of their many conflicts dating back to the 40’s for decades.

I remember thirty something years ago the subject came up and my mother was talking about something that had happened back in the 50’s. She was actually getting angry over it, one of the few times I ever saw her start to get carried away. She began to mention a rumor and suddenly stopped herself short. I noticed a look on her face as if she was angry to have even alluded to it.

I asked her about the rumor and she wouldn’t go any further, her whole attitude shifted. She said that she would not repeat it, no matter what she had done to her in the past or how much she disliked her the very suggestion was beyond the pale and she scolded herself for mentioning it.

Her anger dissipated at once and she gave me a talking to on propriety and respect and she stressed about how one should never go by rumor. It really struck me how ashamed of herself she was. I had never seen that before.

I don’t think I have to say what the rumor was, but it really gives an illustration of how attitudes have changed in just a few generations. My parents did have homosexual acquaintances (as did I) but their orientation was never openly discussed. In those days to suggest or mention it was considered the height of impropriety.

I never knew the mainstream media held such old fashioned values.

Update: Stacy notices that Robert Gibbs thinks he’s my mother.