The Clinton Papers: Elena Kagan paid off with Supreme Court seat?

[5.56NATO]

The Friday release of 10,000 pages of Clinton White House documents scored an enormous amount of media attention with broadcast and print news reporters scouring the pages and covering the sordid Monica Lewinsky affair and the Paula Jones allegations and civil case. However, hidden in the historical documents is evidence that Associate Justice Elena Kagan achieved her position on the nation's highest court as reward for being a "good soldier" in the "war to defend President Bill Clinton."
http://www.examiner.com/article/the-clinton-papers-elena-kagan-paid-off-with-supreme-court-seat


Imagine what another 4 or more years under a Klinton can do for America!

[alismith]

Nothing like rewarding your buddies with good "prizes."

[ltorlo64]

Both sides do this, maybe not with judgeships, but with other special political postings. What gets me is that we expect our judges to be above the activity that we so detest of lawyers, free from the deceptions that lawyers use to prevent the truth from coming out and so prevent justice from being executed. But, at least with the last two justices we find that they were nominated specifically because they were good at hiding the truth. Are we supposed to believe that, since they were so good at hiding the truth, they will be better at seeing through the dishonesty that will come before them?

[alismith]

Both sides do this, maybe not with judgeships, but with other special political postings. What gets me is that we expect our judges to be above the activity that we so detest of lawyers, free from the deceptions that lawyers use to prevent the truth from coming out and so prevent justice from being executed. But, at least with the last two justices we find that they were nominated specifically because they were good at hiding the truth. Are we supposed to believe that, since they were so good at hiding the truth, they will be better at seeing through the dishonesty that will come before them?

No. I'm sure they have no problem being able to identify what is dishonest, but the real problem is that their decisions become the supreme law of the land.

[ltorlo64]

No. I'm sure they have no problem being able to identify what is dishonest, but the real problem is that their decisions become the supreme law of the land.

This is my point, though I did not make it well. If they got to where they are by being dishonest, how are we to believe that they will not make rulings based on dishonesty? Since they are supposed to be the final word on matters of the Constitution, this is a scary proposition. Scarier that the Senate didn't seem to care.