Graham Will Vote for Kagan (of course)

NRO ^ | 07/20/2010 | Daniel Foster

[OldDeckHand]

NBC reports that Judiciary committeeman Sen. Lindsey Graham (R., S.C.) will vote to send the nomination of Elena Kagan to the floor of the U.S. Senate.

[The Pack Knight]

If anyone's interested in an "explanation", Graham is quoted in this NPR blog post by Ken Rudin:

"There are plenty of reasons for conservatives to vote no," Graham said, "But there are plenty to vote yes as well." Kagan, Graham said, is smart, funny, has an impressive background, and is a liberal — "that caught me by surprise," he slyly said. And yes, "I would have picked somebody different," he noted. But as he said during the Sotomayor hearings, he repeated that "elections have consequences" and "elections have meaning." Is the person qualified, he asked? Does she have good character, is she more of a judge than a politician? Well, she passed all those tests, Graham stated. "She will serve this nation honorably," he concluded, saying he will vote in favor of her nomination.

Yes, Senator, elections have consequences. That includes your own, jackass! Or do the voters of South Carolina who put you in the Senate not count?

If the Founders meant that "advice and consent of the Senate" meant that the Senate just rubber stamps the President's nominees because "elections have consequences", they probably would have said so.

If Graham thinks Kagan is the sort of Justice he wants to see on the Supreme Court, or at least that Kagan is the best nominee we're likely to see from Obama, he should say so. I'd also love to hear him elaborate on how he thinks Kagan passed the "is she more of a judge than a politician" test. Instead, he hides behind "elections have consequences" as if the President is the People's Tribune and any Senate opposition to his preferences is illegitimate, which is disgraceful coming from a Senator.

[rmlew]

Never. He was primaried in 2008 and the same idiots who fell for McCain gave light-loafers liberal Lindsey 67% in the 2008 primary.

[erman]

live boy, dead girl FBI files... = RINO

[Dan Nunn]

The cognitive dissonance is stunning. I can't explain it.

It makes perfect sense. Incumbents are incredibly difficult to knock off. Hence the trouble Arizonians are having in knocking off pro-Amnesty McLame when the majority of Arizonians support the new immigration law.

[lodi90]

[AdvisorB]

I’m not the least bit surprised, since they both eat that non-regulation chow.

[upchuck]

Lady Lindsey, another nail in your coffin. You ain't gonna like 2014.

Uber RINO Lindsey Ping
"Republican by day, Democrat by night."

Want on or off this ping list?
Just FReepmail me.
Remember: "I ain't gay." And neither is she.

[556x45]

Two more words...Alvin Greene. :) Its hard to believe SC GOP voters are anymore with it than the dems. Why is Lindsey so diff? Who knows, the answer likely defies rational explanation. :)

[Crichton]

I do believe

Little Lindsey

will be following

gal pal Charlie Crist

"out" of the

GOP

in a year

or three.

[A Strict Constructionist]

“Why does the republican leadership (also known as the party of discipline) allow this guy to serve on the Judiciary Committee?”

The leadership secretly agrees with him. They are for the in crowd regardless of the party.

[Steelfish]

I think Graham (like McCain and Specter) wants to be embraced by the DC Establishment (Think NY Times, Washington Post, and Georgetown elites) as some kind of “statesman” a la Edmund Burke and to hell with the “uneducated” “semi-literate” masses that keep electing them.

[goldendays]

Sen. Lindsey Graham you play a good game

[Candor7]

Does SC have recall for Senators. It should begin immediately. HORRIBLE!

[OldDeckHand]

'Does SC have recall for Senators."

There's no legal "voter" mechanism for the recall of federal office holders, like Senators or Representatives. The Constitution only permits sitting Senators to be removed by other sitting Senators, in a 2/3rds vote called expulsion.

That is not to say states can't hold recall referendums sometimes called advisory notes. It's been done a few times in the past, to limited success, with the premise being the vote is held to pressure the sitting Senator to resign. But, the Senator is not legally bound by such a vote. It's only symbolic.

[infidel29]

So Grahamnesty says 'he wouldn't have selected her for nomination' and that '0bama chose wisely'.

Does this mean Grahamnesty WOULDN'T have chosen wisely? And if this is the case, does he really deserve to keep his senate seat, and do we have to listen to him ever again since he is so unwise?

[mojitojoe]

What the hell is wrong with SC? Too busy watching American Idol and the Bachelor?

[JPG]

Does Miss Kagan have a brother? If so, the true motives of Miss Lindsey may have been uncovered.

[kelly4c]

Lindsey, girl you aint just a bi*** your a traitor

[Theodore R.]

Sadly, the people of SC are so uninformed that most likely don’t know about “Lovable Lindsey’s” record.