[Guest post by DRJ]
Senator Arlen Specter voted “No” on Elena Kagan’s Solicitor General nomination last year when he was a Republican, and even as a Democrat he expressed doubt about supporting her Supreme Court nomination as recently as last month. However, yesterday, Specter announced he now supports Kagan.
Jake Tapper wonders if there is an Obama Administration job offer on the table?
Allahpundit suggests this is proof Obama bribed the wrong Pennsylvania Senate candidate. It could also show Obama was a good judge of whose vote was easier to sway.
UPDATE BY PATTERICO: Specter’s announcement (linked above) is especially annoying given the crocodile tears he cries over a lack of candid responses by Supreme Court candidates:
Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan did little to undo the impression that nominating hearings are little more than a charade in which cautious non-answers take the place of substantive exchanges.
In this, she was following the practice of high court nominees since Judge Robert Bork.
. . . .
. . . Kagan did little to move the nomination hearings from the stylized “farce” (her own word) they have become into a discussion of substantive issues that reveal something of the nominee’s judicial philosophy and predilections.
It may be understandable that she said little after White House coaching and the continuing success of stonewalling nominees. But it is regrettable.
MOVING INTO SAM KINISON MODE: Gee, I wonder why it is that Supreme Court nominees never say anything substantive anymore. Could it be that the last one to do so was Robert Bork, who confidently articulated his positions and backed them up with logic and rigor — only to see [expletive deleted]HOLES LIKE ARLEN SPECTER TWIST HIS WORDS BEYOND ALL RECOGNITION UNTIL THE NOMINEE’S STATEMENTS BECAME A [expletive deleted]ING CARICATURE OF HIS ACTUAL [expletive deleted]ING POSITIONS!!!