Jane Hamsher and I agree on very little. But she was an honest voice on the left railing against ObamaCare, which forces people to buy insurance they don’t want and possibly can’t afford from Big Insurance. Now she sounds, well, eminently reasonable once again:

Like Harriet Miers, she doesn’t have a record to tell us how she would adjudicate from the bench. They led a rebellion against the executive branch and the same thing should happen here. I object to appointment somebody that has no track record. … Accepting Kagan just because people like Obama is wrong. That’s appropriate for American Idol, not the Supreme Court. Nobody knows what she stands for but him. It’s just a cult of personality with Obama. This is the Supreme Court.

Harriet Miers was dumped not only because she had no track record, of course. But why shouldn’t the left take Hamsher’s view? Everyone thinks she’s a liberal, but who knows? And why should the left settle for someone who’s been a squish all her career, trimming and shading to ingratiate herself with both sides and never really showing her hand? (I know, there’s an eerie resemblance there.) I suppose the left could just trust Obama, but he’s the one who disappointed them on the public option. And the Patriot Act. And the release of the detainee-abuse photos. Just saying.

+ A A -
You may also like
Share via
Copy link