Given that the Left has taken to misrepresenting science to meet their political objectives regarding global warming, or whatever it actually is, one could say Elena Kagan was ahead of her time. She was misrepresenting science to get a favorable pro-abortion ruling from SCOTUS back in the Clinton administration. Isn't this a bit dishonest for someone supposedly qualified to sit on the highest court in the land?
Unless there is some other interpretation of these documents that does not occur to me, it appears that Elena Kagan participated in a gigantic scientific deception. On behalf of the Clinton White House, she deliberately subverted what was supposed to be an objective scientific process. The ACOG report was certainly seen in that light by the federal courts. Federal Judge Richard Kopf was deeply impressed by the scientific integrity of the report; he wrote:


If this is true, not only should she immediately withdraw her nomination from the Supreme Court, she should immdiately resign as Solicitor General, and she should face permanent disbarment, if not prosecution.
If the GOP doesn't spend every second of their questioning from this point on by ruthlessly pounding on Kagan over this until she DOES withdraw, they are derelict in their duties.
This is unacceptable. Falsifying evidence to bolster your case is the definition of "not fit to serve".
Posted by: Lightwave | Wednesday, June 30, 2010 at 09:52 AM
Waiting on Coburn to grill her...
Posted by: dissident | Wednesday, June 30, 2010 at 10:42 AM
Elena Kagan?!?!?!? That's who I nominated?? I only saw a picture and thought I was getting Doug Heffernan. WTF?!?!?
OsamaHusseinIslamObama 2012′
(the terrorist-Uighur-ACORN-media choice)
-It’s never too early to campaign-
Posted by: Barry Soetoro (D-King Of The World!) | Wednesday, June 30, 2010 at 02:30 PM
"She was misrepresenting science to get a favorable pro-abortion ruling from SCOTUS...."
Best to indicate you're just repeating Shannen Coffin's silly assertion in order to avoid coming off as equally uninformed, no?
Posted by: ema | Thursday, July 01, 2010 at 10:15 PM