The Democrats endlessly play the race card. What frustrates them is that conservatives basically don’t care about race, so it is hard to impugn them as “racist” without flat-out lying. Thus, we have dirty trick operatives like this supporter of Democrat Jack Conway, who infiltrated a pro-Rand Paul, tea party-type rally with the intention of making racist comments, etc., to provide fodder for the Democratic Party’s effort to smear Paul and his supporters. Unfortunately for him, he was busted:
That’s despicable, of course. But how different is it from Harvard Law School dean Martha Minow accusing Senate Republicans of racism in an op-ed in the Boston Globe? Minow noted that some Republican Senators questioned Elena Kagan’s adherence to the judicial philosophy of Thurgood Marshall, which Minow thinks is out of bounds and can only indicate racial animus, since Marshall was a “saint.”
Many members of the Judiciary Committee criticized Kagan for her admiration of Justice Thurgood Marshall, for whom she clerked.
Let’s pause there. It is common for law clerks to admire the judges for whom they work; no one questioned whether Kagan should admire Marshall. Some Senate Republicans did ask, however, whether she agreed with his expansive view of federal powers and his flexible–to put it kindly–view of the Constitution. Minow continues:
Invoking Justice Marshall now, some want to appeal to and perhaps feed anxieties of some whites about desegregation — and about black men in power.
Really, isn’t Minow even more contemptible than the goofball who tried to infiltrate the Rand Paul rally? She is well aware that Senate Republicans who asked Kagan about Marshall’s judicial philosophy never mentioned, and had no interest in, his race. The argument here is about fidelity to the Constitution, an argument in which Minow has no intention of engaging. She is just another drive-by Democratic Party dirty trickster, but a better-paid one than the Rand Paul infiltrator.
PAUL adds: One of Elena Kagan’s best qualities is the civility she demonstrated as dean of Harvard Law School. Her policy regarding military recruitment was inexcusable, but she treated conservatives with respect and, from all I can tell, was a breath of fresh air at an institution known for demonizing those who reject knee-jerk liberalism. Unfortunately, it’s now clear (and not surprising to those of us familiar with Minow’s work) that the bad old days are back at Harvard Law School.
It should also be noted, as Ed Whelan does, that during the confirmation process Kagan tried to distance herself from Marshall’s leftist vision of the judicial role. So “perhaps it’s Kagan whom Minow ought to be chastising” for playing the race card.