Admit it; the headline isn’t impossible to believe. It’s even less surprising to realize that all of the major criticisms of the Manchurian Candidate-turned-President – lacks relevant experience, a paper trail, or any notable accomplishment aside from self-promotion –are being lodged against his most recent Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan. Sure, as an Assistant White House Counsel, former Harvard Law dean, and Solicitor General she’s held some important positions. But a light scrubbing of that parchment is revealing almost no key accomplishments with any of them.
After reading all of Kagan’s scholarly publications in two decades as an academic – three law review articles, two small essays, and two brief book reviews – law professor Paul Campos makes this observation about its quality in The Daily Beast:
At least in theory Kagan could compensate somewhat for the slenderness of her academic resume through the quality of her work. But if Kagan is a brilliant legal scholar, the evidence must be lurking somewhere other than in her publications. Kagan’s scholarly writings are lifeless, dull, and eminently forgettable. They are, on the whole, cautious academic exercises in the sort of banal on-the-other-handing whose prime virtue is that it’s unlikely to offend anyone in a position of power.
How Obama-esque. Until, that is, ultimate power is achieved and the offending can begin in earnest.
CFIF on Twitter
CFIF on YouTube