KRISTOL’S IDEA OF AN ENDORSEMENT…. The panel on “Fox News Sunday,” not surprisingly, explored the upcoming nomination of a new Supreme Court justice, prompting some odd observations from Bill Kristol.
His analysis started out sounding fairly reasonable. Kristol said President Obama would likely choose a nominee “who’s got high, you know, very hard-to-challenge credentials, and I think that’ll be Solicitor General Kagan.”
He then proceeded to urge Republicans to challenge the hard-to-challenge prospective nominee.
“…I think, for example, Kagan would be a very respectable choice. But nonetheless, I think most Republicans would oppose her and, honestly, should oppose her, with respect and with deference to her, you know, impressive academic credentials, because she will be a reliable liberal vote, and I think Republicans should want to have a serious debate on the Constitution.”
Soon after, Kristol concluded, “I endorse Elena Kagan.”
I see. So, to review, Kristol thinks Solicitor General Elena Kagan has “very hard-to-challenge credentials” and would be a “very respectable choice” for the high court. He also thinks Senate Republicans should fight against her, if she’s nominated, because she isn’t conservative enough.
And then to top it off, Kristol “endorsed” Kagan’s nomination.
It’s a good thing we have conservative pundits like Kristol to help sort through complex political dynamics; otherwise, things might get confusing.