Patterico's Pontifications

5/22/2010

Kagan’s Treatment of the Military

Filed under: Judiciary — DRJ @ 11:22 am



[Guest post by DRJ]

PowerLine’s Paul Mirengoff considers a Washington Post article by a Harvard Law graduate, Marine Captain Robert Merrill, who says Elena Kagan’s attitude toward the military is fair enough:

“Writing in the Washington Post, Merrill defends Elena Kagan from charges that she is anti-military. He argues that Kagan’s discriminatory treatment of military recruiters at Harvard didn’t impair military recruitment. And he recalls that Kagan hosted a Veterans Day dinner for vets every year.
***
Merrill’s defense of Kagan is not persuasive. Suppose a law school dean treated recruiters from the NAACP Legal Defense Fund less favorably than all other outside recruiters. Would it be a defense to say that the Fund was still able to attract recruits and that the dean invited African-American students to dinner on Martin Luther King’s birthday? Of course not.

Merrill also overlooks the fact that Kagan violated the Solomon Amendment, the federal law requiring universities that accept federal money to grant military recruiters the same access as other recruiters.

Merrill, I assume, is correct that Kagan likes and respects individual members of the military. And she would probably be perfectly okay with a military that conducted itself in accordance with her political and social preferences. But Kagan was hostile to the military we have and, more importantly, treated it less favorably than the law allowed it to be treated.”

The Harvard Law graduate gets schooled by the Stanford Law graduate.

— DRJ

10 Responses to “Kagan’s Treatment of the Military”

  1. Proof that being a lawyer detrimental to even the stongest of character. Grow a pair Marine! Semper Fi!

    PatriotRider (8d9a6f)

  2. S/B is detrimental.

    PatriotRider (8d9a6f)

  3. Moreover, Harvard accepts money from the Saudi govt, despite the Saudi’s persecution of homosexuals, religious bigotry, and abuse of women. Note also that the DADT statute was written by, and passed by Demo majorities in both houses, and signed by Boy Clinton. all of those Dems were welcome guests at Harvard.

    John Cunningham (1cb7c8)

  4. Another interesting note is that Capt. Merrill is posted as a JAG to a Battalion. Now, not having been in the Corps, but it is my understanding that a Battalion is a combat entity and is the pointy end of the spear. Is he there to provide Miranda Warnings to the Taliban? Or, perhaps just the mundane things like making sure DoD doesn’t screw up some grunts family-allowance payments to the wife and kids back home?

    Wonder if he sleeps in his body-armor?

    AD - RtR/OS! (3c862f)

  5. he’s probably there to tell the BC weather or not they can conduct certain missions or if they can kill any particular set of bad guys that have been spotted.

    he also is there to second guess those out in the field who get into shooting incidents.

    nice to know that his particular price is a couple of free meals and the odd stroke j*b.

    redc1c4 (fb8750)

  6. Say what you will about Captain Bobby Marrill,
    He may not be very bright,
    But every Jarhead learns the drill
    Even if he’s unable to distinguish wrong from right.

    When it comes to sensitivity to Lefty concerns,
    He’s taken all the classes,
    Bobby knows all the PC terms,
    And, he also knows how to shine up to the top brass,
    Bobby puts on his bell boy costume and rotates on his naked ass.

    ropelight (4a690a)

  7. Comment by ropelight — 5/22/2010 @ 2:14 pm

    Love it.

    AD - RtR/OS! (3c862f)

  8. “…he’s probably there to tell the BC weather or not they can conduct certain missions or if they can kill any particular set of bad guys that have been spotted…”

    And it is just this type of protocol that gets good Marines/Soldiers/etc DEAD!

    We are slowly turning into all that is bad about NATO.
    When we don’t have the will to fight anymore, who will stand atop the ramparts?

    AD - RtR/OS! (3c862f)

  9. Did Kagan or Harvard ban any of the Democratics that actually voted for DADT? Did they ever ban anyone fronm the government that supported the previous policy?

    Does anyone doubt that Kagan knew that if she allowed the military on campus her career would be over?

    If she really supports the military it means she is afraid of acting on her principles when they are an inconvenient roadblock to her career.

    MU789 (aad8cf)

  10. redc14 – Almost certainly what a big part of his current job is. I have heard multiple stories from frustrated troops about the lawfare as it is currently being practiced. Current ROE’s in Afghanistan and the requirements they put on our troops and commanders are getting troops killed. Worst are probably the requirement that certain actions only be approved by officers of a specified rank or position. In civilian life I can require that some actions have to be approved by an executive of Band-5 or above, because in civilian life good men are not dieing because they can not get an airstrike approved because the Colonel’s in the head.

    Have Blue (854a6e)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.0786 secs.