"The Kagan Rope-A-Dope?"

[Clio the Leo]

An interesting theory...

The Kagan Rope-A-Dope?
1 MAY 2010 03:25 PM

There are three possibilities, it seems to me, behind the kerfuffle over Elena Kagan's emotional orientation. The first is that her orientation is heterosexual and she is merely a dedicated career person who never had time for a date. The second is that she is lesbian, and she remains in a glass closet, and the Obamaites, revealing their usual tone-deafness on gay issues, never asked and blundered into this. The third is that she is a highly cautious political lesbian who has drawn a line around her real life in order to prevent her orientation being used against her - especially by the Christianist right.

The reason I doubt the first is that the administration had a clear opportunity to say so yesterday and punted. The reason I doubt the second is that the president had a dry run on this a while back in the Domenech incident. He could not have been surprised by the press questions yesterday and he cannot be that politically dumb.

So what if the third option is correct and Obama is actually being extremely shrewd?

If he or Kagan had announced her sexual orientation from the get-go, it would allow the Christianist right to portray her nomination as a "homosexual-lesbian" take-over of the court, enabled by a radical commie/Muslim president. But by remaining silent and ambiguous on this, the Obama peeps can either depend on the whole thing going away - or wait for some kind of outing, and capitalize on the inevitable sympathy that would prompt among senators, and make her confirmation a shoo-in. It would be better for Obama to provoke such an outing from his "left". That would allow senators to rally around the closet their generation cherishes and defend a person from "charges" that invade her "privacy." Win-win, right?

The president can say, appealing to the middle, that he respects privacy and has reluctantly allowed Kagan to come out under despicable pressure from people like me. Then he dares the Christianist right to vote against her merely because she is a discreet lesbian. And so his jujitsu becomes a triumph for gay rights, and his nominee, who I suspect is far more left-liberal than anyone now believes, helps shape the court for a generation.

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2010/05/the-kagan-ropeadope.html

[babylonsister]

1. Rope-a-dope? Nope...

and Sully is being an ass about this imo. Why is it so bloody important, iow, WHO CARES??

http://mediamatters.org/blog/201005110065
Rumors

[Inuca]

6. Agree

Nobody's business but her own.

[Karenina]

2. No matter what corner you be standin' on...

She's a Trojan Horse!!! :rofl::rofl::rofl:

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

3. Is emotional orientation the new term?

Honest question.

[Clio the Leo]

8. I think that was just a clever turn of phrase by the author.

I thought that was .... um ... interesting.

[Jersey Devil]

13. nice catch, i missed that

Rather odd phrasing and can't remember ever seeing it put quite that way before.

[AtomicKitten]

4. Why is this even an issue? nt

[polichick]

5. Well, I don't care about her orientation but I sure hope it's true...

...that she is "far more left-liberal than anyone now believes"

[Cant trust em]

7. I choose to not make this my business.

Just like I choose to not speculate if John Roberts is gay.

[BootinUp]

9. Leave her private life out of it. nt

[Name removed]

10. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[monmouth]

11. If it was ever relevant I would have questioned Roberts gayability

before Kagen.

[Jersey Devil]

12. I really couldn't give a rat's patoot what her sexual orientation is

Why can't we just leave it at that? Wouldn't it be something good to celebrate that no one really cares?

[GoCubsGo]

14. Not just her sexual orientation, but her marital status.

I'm fed up with the attitude that if one isn't married by a certain age, they are either a homosexual, or there is something wrong with them. Some of us are just are not able to meet "the right one", and the rest aren't worth the effort of trying to maintain a relationship. Try finding Mr/Ms. Right in Christofacistland when you are a liberal agnostic.

[Jersey Devil]

16. Yes, agreed

I've seen some of that first hand with my brother who never married and has to sometimes grin and bear it when he hears the rumors and insinuations about whether he is gay or whether there is something fundamentally wrong with him simply because he never married. He laughs it off but I have to think it must bother him a great deal.

[ultracase24]

15. her sexual orientation is being pushed

by people who are trying to divert attention to the fact that she seems to be a neo-con sympathizer. Look, over here at Kagan's sexuality. Pay no attention to the fact she covered for the Saudi's 9/11 garbage under Obama. Dont look behind the curtain and see that she is anti-choice.

People are catching on to the tricks.

[Jersey Devil]

17. Good grief!

It seems you were blessed with an active and creative imagination.

Yeah, sure, she is a "neo-con sympathizer". And she was clever enough to clerk for Justice Thurgood Marshall and call him her "hero" in order to carry out her diabolical scheme. :sarcasm:

Jeezus!

[ultracase24]

18. usually wolves have to dress up as sheep

to not be noticed. People are starting to wake up and see the wolves for what they are.

[Jersey Devil]

20. Speaking of wolves

I think you've been howling at the moon.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L28CnhmeAD4

[HughMoran]

19. "Kagan .. a neo-con sympathizer"

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

outrageous.

[ultracase24]

21. yes, she filed briefs to oppose the SC hearing

the Seigelman case. She also supported efforts as solicitor under Obama to shield the Saudi government from lawsuits related to 9/11.

yea, that's what we call a neo-con sympathizer. Its actually pretty sad. But I guess the joke will be on us after all.

[HughMoran]

23. lol - you're oblivious as to the responsibilities of the Solicitor General

I'm never talking to you again - you're deliberately being deceptive.

[stevenleser]

29. Yeah, live one that... n/t

[alcibiades_mystery]

30. Your interlocutor

is an imbecile. Pay no attention to imbeciles.

[stevenleser]

28. Why would the Saudi government be liable for 9/11? If American citizens go wacky overseas, should US

taxpayers have to pay civil damages? Fighting that is not being a neo-con sympathizer, that is being rational. And by the way, Americans commit crimes overseas all the time, as do the citizens of other countries. Should we all be suing each other over that?

I'd also hardly call arguing against cert in the Siegelman case evidence of being "a neo-con". That is beyond a stretch.

[ultracase24]

32. The Bush administration and now the Obama administration

agree with you. The Saudi government has effectively been shielded against any lawsuits first with Bush and now with Obama. We've never had a case where 15 of our citizens have flown planes into building overseas. and to answer your question, yes we do, and yes people from other countries do sue over criminal acts commited by foreign nationals.

[stevenleser]

34. So what? I am sure Bush and Obama both agree that we need Oxygen to breathe

If you and I agree are we neocons?

The fact that any government is held responsible if one of their citizens does something wrong in another country is stupid. I hope every such case loses. I am thrilled if we attempted to stop such a lawsuit from going forward in the case of 9/11.

Perhaps you are enamored of the idea of paying for crimes by fellow US Citizens overseas. I am not. Please feel free to overpay your taxes if you feel so strongly about the subject.

[ultracase24]

37. Wekl, thousands of families that were devastated on 9/11

disagree with you. You also must support Bush's efforts to stop soldiers and contractors from being prosecuted from war crimes, right? Obama has also continued that, so you are in good company. Here's a good article:

http://www.cleveland.com/nation/index.ssf/2010/05/elena_kagan_criticized_for_get.html

""It was on May 29 of last year that Kagan -- as U.S. solicitor general -- filed legal papers with the Supreme Court urging it not to hear arguments in a lawsuit against the government of Saudi Arabia brought by thousands of family members and other victims of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks
""

So you disagree with the thousands of American families destroyed by the attacks on 9/11 that they should have had the right to sue for damages?


Kagan, Obama, and Bush all agree with you.

[Hekate]

22. That is definitely one of the more bizarre charges leveled at her, isn't it.

[HughMoran]

24. It reeks

I can't even say what I think of it as my post would get deleted.

[Jersey Devil]

26. I kind of like the way this thread is degenerating

Not that it wasn't somewhat nutty in the first place, mind ya.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_TA3c1YqCiI

[PopSixSquish]

27. There are Several Decaffeinated Brands on the Market That are Just as Tasty

:bounce:

[Hekate]

25. Andrew Sullivan has believed that Obama is a rope-a-dope artist since the campaign...

During the campaign Sullivan also referred to Obama as a Trickster on the model of the Roadrunner outfoxing Wile E. Coyote. You can tell he really admires that trait (or what he sees as that trait) in Obama.

We shall see.

Hekate

[Raine1967]

31. Why is this never asked of Males on the court?

You know we have had a few unmarried SCOTUS appointees. Just sayin'

[Phx_Dem]

33. I generally like Sullivan, but I couldn't disagree with him more about

asking her sexual orientaiton.

How about IT'S NONE OF YOUR FUCKING BUSINESS.

If Kagan should be asked if she's a lesbian, does that mean every person who interviews for a job should be asked if they're gay? And while we're at it, maybe they should be asked what political party they are affiliated with.

:puke:

[pmorlan1]

35. 3 dimensional chess and now rope-a- dope?

Sounds more like wishful thinking to me.

[Prism]

36. Straight people telling LGBTers to mind their manners on LGBT issues. Hilarious.

The heterosexual privilege surrounding Kagan is absolutely suffocating at this point.

I really hate agreeing with Sullivan on anything at all, but I do here. It's ok to ask.

And this whole "It's none of our business!" screaming in response to a question about someone's basic relationships is never used with straight politicians.

I don't know if I have it in me to explain the homophobia involved. It's so crazy widespread here, I'm not sure there's any point to it now.