Since the Leftist leech who relies on me for material for his "blog" hasn't allowed comments yet or posted more than lame responses to the blogs I've written, the point has been made to my satisfaction. Leftists talk a great game, but delivering? That's above their pay grade. Just look at President Obama.
Elena Kagan's nomination to the USSC has run into another snag. As Solicitor General, Kagan's office (and Kagan herself) took an interesting position against free speech in their arguments in Citizens United v. FEC, which dealt with campaign finance reform. Kagan's office suggested in an opening argument in the case that the government could ban books that endorsed a particular candidate. When questioned on the initial argument before the USSC, Kagan's position changed slightly, but left the door open to ban political pamphlets under certain circumstances.
And this is the woman Obama wants to put on the Supreme Court?
This gives us a chance to explore a fundamental difference between liberals and Leftists. Liberals would oppose Kagan's nomination because they still have a healthy respect for the Constitution and free speech. Leftists, on the other hand, see the Constitution as an impediment to their desires for control, so they find ways to circumvent it or justify it by claiming a "greater good" overrules the Constitution. This is made easier with the Left's "living document" argument pertaining to the Constitution. That way they can make the Constitution say whatever they want it to say, even if it goes against what the Constitution actually says.
We've already seen Kagan's position on the Second Amendment, which is decidedly anti-gun rights. With this latest revelation, we can chalk up an active disdain for the First Amendment right to free speech to the list of concerns about Elena Kagan's USSC nomination.
And this is the woman Leftists want to put on the Supreme Court?