That’s Jaws You Just Jumped There

Sullivan has spent the last couple of days trying to out Elena Kagan, having little to no success because she is either not gay or has no desire to be outed as gay to advance Sully’s cause as the first openly gay Supreme Court Justice. Since he flatly rejects that she may be straight, he is now working on alternative theories as to why she has not come out of the closet, and offered up this gem of a reader suggestion:

Has it occurred to you that Ms. Kagan may not know her identity? If she is indeed gay, is it not possible that it is something that she herself has not come to terms with?

Yeah. That’s a real winner there, Sully. She just doesn’t know if she is gay or not. She’s only had fifty years.

BTW- Does anyone know what color I am supposed to turn my webpage for this crisis?

Title stolen shamelessly from commenter Stuck.






174 replies
  1. 1

    I’m gay and Sully is a fucking moron. We don’t need a gay Supreme for validation.

  2. 2
    LD50 says:

    BTW- Does anyone know what color I am supposed to turn my webpage for this crisis?

    Pink, I assume.

  3. 3
    Erik Vanderhoff says:

    Seriously, what is Sullivan’s motherfuckin’ deal here? Kagan’s been in public service for decades, including within the Clinton White House, which was subjected to what is probably the most aggressive opposition research ever. Hell, The New Republic profiled her back in 1998. She’s been the dean of Harvard friggin’ Law. If there was any outing to be done, it would be done already.

  4. 4
    dmsilev says:

    Did Elena Kagan give birth to Trig Palin? It would be irresponsible not to speculate.

    For colors, I’d go with rainbow.

    dms

  5. 5
    cleek says:

    anti-pink. so… teal.

  6. 6
    licensed to kill time says:

    __

    BTW- Does anyone know what color I am supposed to turn my webpage for this crisis?

    Rainbow. Duh.

  7. 7
    LD50 says:

    We’ve known for a while that Sullivan has, uh, issues with women. That seems to be the only way to make sense of his behavior in this case.

  8. 8
    Zifnab says:

    @toujoursdan: Wait, so that thing Scalia and Thomas had going on… doesn’t qualify?

    Also, maybe Sully should consider wrapping up his “Palin’s baby’s mama” theory before he starts diving off into the next pile of fruit loops.

    I’m beginning to think I get what draws Andrew Sullivan to conservatism. He’s not in it to be a libertarian or oppose taxes or for small government. He just loves himself some conspiracy.

  9. 9

    Christ. Just tell Sully there’s a video of her fucking Todd Palin.

  10. 10
    Garrigus Carraig says:

    @Erik Vanderhoff: Clearly he believes his investigation fu is the strongest.

  11. 11
    dmsilev says:

    @August J. Pollak:

    Christ. Just tell Sully there’s a video of her fucking Todd Sarah Palin.

    Fixed for maximal hilarity.

    dms

  12. 12
    JM says:

    I guess it doesn’t occur to Sully that not everyone is defined by their orientation.

  13. 13
    DonkeyKong says:

    The anti-lavender is sea foam.

  14. 14
    Waynski says:

    @Erik Vanderhoff: This. Sully’s getting a little bat shit about this and as you point out, being in public life for fifty years sort of makes the possibility that no one woould come forward to say she’s gay a pretty remote possibility.

    On color: Chartreuse.

  15. 15
    slippy says:

    I never did like Sully because I believed he was a fucking moron. After finding out that he enthusiastically supported the Bell Curve nonsense, he proved that beyond a reasonable doubt.

    So, I really don’t care what his opinion of Kagan is. I wish he would just shut the fuck up. He has destroyed his credibility as any kind of serious intellectual. If I ever meet him I’m going to point and laugh loudly in his face, and never ever allow him an opportunity to speak. Fuck him.

  16. 16
    General Egali Tarian Stuck says:

    LOL, I am honored

    I would go with mournful black, it is all purpose when dealing with varying degrees of perpetual disappointment. You can adjust the shade as conditions warrant, right up to we are all gonna die jet black.

    This situation could be the shade of Sully being in the dark about something none of his beeswax, nor anyone’s.

  17. 17
    You Don't Say says:

    As I’ve said elsewhere, Sullivan’s ‘Is Kagan gay?’ obsession may turn me off him for good. Here is someone else who’s disgusted with it: http://www.thenation.com/blog/.....mailNation

  18. 18
    trollhattan says:

    The An other meme Sully’s pushing is that Kagan has been groomed for the supreme court since childhood. I guess it’s because she had so many women justices to model herself after back in the ’60s. Was this orchestrated by the same crew that planted Obama’s fake Hawaii birth certificate?

    Yup, he’s gone full Trig with this one.

    Also too, check out the Firebag pushback Tbogg’s receiving for not grabbing his torch.

    http://tbogg.firedoglake.com/2.....mely-evil/

  19. 19
    eemom says:

    is Sully an American citizen? Can we take him to Arizona and see what happens?

  20. 20

    Seriously, what is Sullivan’s motherfuckin’ deal here?

    Well, gosh, tell me if you’ve heard this before: he’s demanding something that is completely unattainable (if Kagan is straight, then there is literally no way to prove this to him), and exploiting that to craft an opposition to someone devoid of needing actual thought or analysis.

    Andrew Sullivan is a birther. But he gets to play “sensible conservative” this way.

  21. 21
    Punchy says:

    I guess it doesn’t occur to Sully that not everyone is defined by their orientation.

    Those tasked with using sextants would disagree.

  22. 22
    jl says:

    We know Kagan is a bit plump. Let’s stick with that important issue. Then we can just combine wtih ‘Algore is fat’ and save space.

  23. 23
    TomG says:

    I guess you can throw me into the “Andrew is really pushing me away from his blog” camp as well. I’m never one to expect total agreement with the people I read even daily, but Andrew keeps pushing the limit on what is sensible.

  24. 24
    gwangung says:

    Um, who the hell cares if Kagan is straight? Or gay? Or bi? Or whatever?

    (Now, if I were courtin’ her, I might be concerned, but that ain’t anything there for Sully….)…

  25. 25
    cleek says:

    @trollhattan:
    the perpetually angry remain angry.

  26. 26
    Proper Gander says:

    Ahhh, colors. So subjective.

    If we’re changing website colors, I’d go with dusty teal or blush pink, instead of anything suggested by the men in the linked survey.

  27. 27
    DonkeyKong says:

    Did Thurgood Marshall fly to Manhattan fifty years ago with amniotic fluid dripping off his robes to give birth to Elena Kagan?

    DO NOT REST MR. COLE UNTIL WE GET AN ANSWER! I SAY DO…NOT…REST SIR!

  28. 28
    twiffer says:

    wait, i haven’t been following this. why is she supposed to be gay? just cause?

  29. 29
    Alex S. says:

    I admit, I read Sully’s blog every now and then. About 50% of the time I do it because I use blogs as link aggregators, not really as opinion shapers, and his blog covers a wide variety of issues. The other 50% of the time I want to watch Sully’s obsessive personality. Just like Ross Douthat’s columns, it’s like staring into a psychological abyss.

  30. 30
    Fwiffo says:

    I think people are born with a particular sexual orientation. Except in this case. When Andrew Sullivan was a child a vagina killed his dog.

  31. 31
    El Cid says:

    I am so thankful that people who spend their time reading what Andrew Sullivan argues keep me informed, because without that I’d be entirely ignorant of his continued calm brilliance.

  32. 32
    sherifffruitfly says:

    C’mon Sully. Seriously. C’mon.

    It is not the god-given duty of every gay person to be a history-making civil rights leader. It is their choice.

    Let her fuck whomever she wants to fuck, and tell us if she wants to tell us. (Though I really don’t care.)

  33. 33
    Face says:

    Um, who the hell cares if Kagan is straight? Or gay?

    Cuz she’d legalize all-womyn tickle fights, pillow fights, and topless mud wrestling.

    Duh.

  34. 34
    cleek says:

    @gwangung:
    exactly.

    in the words of one blogger:

    And yet we have been told by many that she is gay … It should mean nothing either way.

    but that was while linked-blogger was busy trying to enumerate all the ways in which it does matter, to him.

  35. 35

    What strikes me about Sully’s Kagan ranting is that he’s basically saying that Kagan is the precise polar opposite of Palin — whom he also loathes with a passion.

    So, yeah, maybe he just doesn’t like women (though he lurvs him some Thatcher).

    The other funnier thing is that his whole self-groomed-to-be-a-non-boat-rocking-top-tier-of-Constitution-officer “critique” could also be quasi-accurately aimed at … Obama.

  36. 36
    geg6 says:

    I hate to tell that hairy old queen, but I’m older than Elena Kagan, I’ve never had children, I’ve never married, and only two of my co-workers have ever met my John and that was only by accident. I concentrated all my efforts my entire adult life into my education and career. I don’t discuss my personal life at work. I don’t take my SO to work functions. And I certainly never discuss my sex life at work.

    Oh, and I have a very butch haircut.

    So obviously, Sully probably thinks I should be outed, too.

  37. 37

    We’re all Trig Palin Now.

  38. 38
    Bad Horse's Filly says:

    This whole discussion makes me ill. There is so much wrong with this speculation I do not know where to begin.

    Color: Rainbow for sure.

  39. 39
    Derek says:

    I was wondering if anybody noticed how stupid this most recent bugbear is. His logic is incredibly flawed, that she must be gay so not coming out would be an endorsement of the “closet”. Which is stupid for two if not more reasons; 1. She could be, not gay and B. Even if she was, it could just be an endorsement of the right of a person to say, none of your fucking business you amoral vultures.

    Between this and his creaming himself over Tories and what not, well… he’s the same as ever, I suppose, but there was a good run there before Sarah Palin broke his brain by exposing him to what conservatism really means.

  40. 40
    Barbara says:

    Colour: Mauve. Just knowing that there is a color called mauve is probably enough, but did you know there are different shades of mauve. I would go with “Opera Mauve.” Yes: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mauve

    Yes, Sullivan’s off on one of his tedious obsessive searches for someone else’s personal truth. I think he should have learned his lesson after failing once and for all to prove the true parentage of Trig. I mean, at least there is a birth certificate somewhere for Trig, but no one has ever issued a certificate of gay authenticity.

  41. 41
    Montysano says:

    @trollhattan:

    Also too, check out the Firebag pushback Tbogg’s receiving for not grabbing his torch.

    Sweet FSM, reading that was more painful than punching myself in the face. To recap: Obama ran as a cautious, pragmatic centrist, and now stubbornly refuses to govern as a wild-eyed leftwing DFH.

  42. 42

    @Face: And who, exactly would be against that?

    @General Egali Tarian Stuck: Not black. Black is my favorite color. I will not have it sullied by Sully. Pink. My least-fave color. But then I would have to stare at a pink BJ all day (heh). Um, brown. I don’t hate it; I don’t love it. Works for me.

    Sully is, was, probably always be a wanker of the first degree. How about he fixate on whether Rekers is gay or not and leave Kagan alone?

    @geg6: But, but, but, you and me! We were gonna do that topless politics show…I thought it meant something!

  43. 43
    Nate Dawg says:

    Not to defend Sully on this one, but she is a lesbian, John. It’s not a secret to anyone who runs in Harvard circles. Obama most certainly knows, as does Sully. (Hence his flat rejection).

    I don’t think it’s problematic why she’s not out–she doesn’t want to be, for career reasons–as is her prerogative.

    I wonder if her partner (a lesbian as well) could ask her if she knows if she’s gay or not.

  44. 44
    JMY says:

    At least with this nomination, we know that, as a skinny black man, Obama has a thing for big white women…

  45. 45
    trollhattan says:

    @The Confidence Man:

    So, yeah, maybe he just doesn’t like women (though he lurvs him some Thatcher).

    But she’s a MAN, baby!

  46. 46
    Lord Omlette says:

    A close friend recently began the process to switch sex from female to male. He’s well over 50, he gave birth to a son over 30 years ago and he served in the Army for 20 years. No, 50 years isn’t enough time to figure it out.

    Can you imagine how Kagan must feel if she really isn’t as sure about these things as the commenter implies? Not everyone is as certain about their gender identity and/or sexuality as you or I…

  47. 47
    Mark S. says:

    Did Sully have anything to say when some asshole group was demanding Lindsay Graham to out himself a couple weeks ago?

  48. 48
    Ann B. Nonymous says:

    In his mind, Sullivan can’t be a hypocrite, because he feels so PASSIONATELY about it.

    Sometimes I wish that pundits underwent the Yakuza treatment every time they were this intellectually lazy. How many finger joints does the human hand have? Unfortunately, Stumpy Andrew would probably switch to dictation.

  49. 49
    R-Jud says:

    @The Confidence Man:

    So, yeah, maybe he just doesn’t like women (though he lurvs him some Thatcher).

    I don’t think androids count as “women”.

  50. 50
    Comrade Kevin says:

    @Nate Dawg: Ilove comments like that. They’re perfect examples of evidence-free, insidery “I’m pretending to know something you don’t” wanking.

  51. 51
    Nate Dawg says:

    The whole argument “If she were gay, someone would out her” is so ridiculous.

    There are several prominent, well-known homosexuals, who despite having being outed, remain in the closet. Lindsey Graham, first and foremost, but several others as well. Charlie Christ, as well.

    Go see the movie “OUTrage” and ask yourself why so many politicans are able to remain closeted despite the media knowing they are gay?

    Having not been outed is not a very good indicator of one’s sexual orientation.

  52. 52
    thefncrow says:

    @You Don’t Say: You know, when I rolled over that link, I was kinda disappointed for just a moment. Then it hit me, as it should have struck me from the open, that the question mark is in there as the start of the query string variables and not part of the actual URL.

  53. 53

    @TomG: Thirded on the “pushing me away”. I’ve written him, and he seems to see the opposition as…hell, I don’t know. Naive? Evil? Stupid? Every time he posts about this, he has a new story as to why it’s so important.

    It’s beyond disturbing, and pointing out that he only seems to do this to women (as someone who defends Palin against the scurrilous stuff, while disliking almost every inch of her actions and political stances) underlines Sully’s stupidity on this point. As I said when I wrote him, it’s like he’s learned every wrong lesson from identity politics.

    I do like reading him. He can write amazing and insightful essays on topics. But his biases and lack of self-refinement are serious, and ugly, liabilities.

  54. 54

    @Nate Dawg: Neither is just stating something to the opposite without any proof. Who is her partner, pray tell?

    Plus, from one of the links on BJ (hope I’m not hallucinating), the White House issued a statement that she is not gay. That’s pretty bold.

  55. 55
    jl says:

    Some one has contrasted David Brooks’ views on Roberts and Kagan.

    The David Brooks Spin Machine: From Roberts To Kagan
    By Bill Scher
    Blog for our future
    May 11, 2010 – 9:51am ET

    Both [Kagan and Roberts] are accomplished lawyers who graduated from Harvard to serve Presidents, widely seen among legal professionals as exceptionally bright, even though both wrote little about controversial constitutional issues throughout their careers.

    You would expect that a prominent columnist like the New York Times’ David Brooks, who regularly lauds pragmatism and meritocracy, would have a similar reaction to both nominations.

    On What Brooks Loves

    From July 21, 2005: “Roberts nomination, how do I love thee? Let me count the ways. I love thee with the depth and breadth and height my soul can reach. I love thee freely, as men strive for right. I love thee because this is the way government is supposed to work.”

    From May 11, 2010: “One scans her public speeches looking for a strong opinion, and one comes up empty.”

    http://www.ourfuture.org/blog-.....erts-kagan

    found via Daily Kos

  56. 56
    gwangung says:

    @Nate Dawg: Still, who (with more than a handful of working brain cells) cares?

    (Other than the result that I won’t be coming a’courtin’…)

  57. 57
    Nate Dawg says:

    Hey Kev,

    I don’t know you, but you can do some sleuthing on your own. Go find someone who is either a student, recent graduate, worker, or connected alum at the Harvard Law School. Befriend them. Then find out that I’m right.

    Just because I don’t have proof doesn’t make my “inside info” wrong. And the information is so out there it’s laughable watching straight people with no connection to the community mock and laugh at the suggestion at what EVEVERYONE KNOWS is true.

    It’s kind of frustrating…makes me wish she’d get outted so ya’ll would think twice about dismissing gay people’s “inside info” in the future.

  58. 58
    David says:

    People with Asberger’s Syndrome are sometimes the most brilliant people but just have absolutely zero interest in dating, emotions, or sex. Or sometimes they are interested but dealing with it just isn’t worth it to them.

    It’s not a plus or a minus in my opinion.

  59. 59
    Breezeblock says:

    I only care if Justice Kagan is gay for the head-explosions we would see on the right. But this “is she or isn’t she” is almost as fun.

    Otherwise, me no give rat’s ass.

  60. 60
    Morbo says:

    Seriously, what is Sullivan’s motherfuckin’ deal here? Kagan’s been in public service for decades, including within the Clinton White House

    There you go right there.

  61. 61
    stuckinred says:

    @Lord Omlette: There is nothing in all this bullshit that she and the administration didn’t know would be said when they put her forth.

  62. 62
    John Cole says:

    @Nate Dawg: I’m not mocking that she might be gay. I’m mocking that Sullivan demand she out herself and I’m mocking people who insist she is gay.

    She might very well be gay.

  63. 63
    mr. whipple says:

    Yeah. That’s a real winner there, Sully. She just doesn’t know if she is gay or not. She’s only had fifty years

    I’m only 49, so this gives me another year to decide, I guess.

  64. 64
    Sentient Puddle says:

    @Nate Dawg:

    It’s kind of frustrating…

    That we don’t believe your unsourced assertions about something that nobody who counts honestly gives a damn about?

  65. 65
    licensed to kill time says:

    I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by Sully because they won’t tell us which way their pens and hoohas schwing before they become a judge.

  66. 66

    @Sentient Puddle: Um, you put it much better than I did. So, I am editing my post. Thanks. Your cooler head prevailed.

  67. 67
    Comrade Kevin says:

    @Nate Dawg: Why should I do the sleuthing to prove your assertion for you?

  68. 68
    wrb says:

    Seems to me that if she is gay and he succeeds the outcome will be a failed nomination.

    I don’t think that an openly gay person could be confirmed at this point. The conservadems wouldn’t be willing to take the punishment their voters would inflict on them. I could be wrong.

    However now it will be “it is not the orientation, it is the deception.”

    Kinda the Clinton trap. Ask a question that is none of their damn business and then use the inadequacy of the answer/lie as the club.

    It sure as hell won’t be gain for gays that he imagines.

    Way to go Andrew.

  69. 69

    Maybe it’s my Canadian background but I don’t see the point of discussing it.

    When I lived in Ottawa everyone knew there are several people in prominent government positions (like John Baird) that everyone knows is gay, but it’s just not talked about in the press. He doesn’t deny it, he’ no homophobe, he’s not hurting anyone and it’s considered nobody’s business. (He’s scummy for a whole lot of other reasons – he fucked over welfare recipients, but since he isn’t an anti-gay crusader so the press keeps its hands off.)

    The U.S. used to have a press that functioned like this too…

  70. 70
    trollhattan says:

    Kan I haz a three-step plan?

    Step 1. TNC, Ambinder and Fallows go out for a beer.
    Step 2. The Atlantic obliterates “Voices” and creates a new “Three Guys who can both think and write at the same time” blog page.
    Step 3. TNC, Ambinder and Fallows return to work.

  71. 71
    Face says:

    Lindsey Graham, first and foremost, but several others as well. Charlie Christ, as well.

    Wow. All so unsubstantiated, all so without solid basis (“they’re unmarried!” doesn’t cut it).

  72. 72
    Elizabelle says:

    I like Andrew Sullivan, but have been cringing at what he’s doing re Kagan.

    And comment 65 by licensed is perfect.

  73. 73
    xanthippas says:

    What the hell is Sullivan’s deal with middle-aged white women in politics?

  74. 74
    mcd410x says:

    Since we sleep 1/3 of our lives, she’s really just entering her 33rd year of not knowing and half of those were adolescence or before.

    Now, how do I work dear Scarlett J. into this point …

  75. 75

    @twiffer:

    As I said in the other thread she is 50, female, single and childless in the wingnut mind that = gay. (See for instance Rice, Condi and they liked her!)

  76. 76
    mcd410x says:

    And, of course, all this distracts from determining if she’s the Left’s version of Harriet Miers. Perhaps that’s the point.

  77. 77
    MinneapolisPipe says:

    I don’t care if all she has for a “partner” is a blow-up doll in her room.

    If she defends the Bill of Rights and the interests of citizens over corporations (apparently receiving full personhood these days), then she’ll always have my support.

    Who gives a shyte what she does in her free time?

  78. 78
    Elizabelle says:

    @Mark S.:

    I was wondering about that too, with respect to Senator Graham. I don’t recall a campaign by Sully like this one, per se.

  79. 79
    robertdsc says:

    BTW- Does anyone know what color I am supposed to turn my webpage for this crisis?

    LMAO. Brilliant.

    Stuff like her orientation doesn’t matter one bit to me.

  80. 80
    georgia pig says:

    This is why it’s foolish to ever take anything Sully says seriously. He’s like my dog, who obsessively sniffs any location where another dog may have shit or pissed, but is utterly clueless about the station wagon closing in on her in the middle of the street. He only becomes passionate about the things he finds personally important or distasteful or about which he can get a mancrush woody.

  81. 81
    Comrade Kevin says:

    We need to get back to the main point, about Sullivan and sharks. I suspect he was born on the far side of the shark.

  82. 82
    Church Lady says:

    I vote of rainbow as well.

    Something is very, very wrong with dear Andy. His fixation with Palin and his constant desire to examine her hooha exhibits some type of mental unbalance. Now he’s taking it to Elena Kagen. Maybe Andy just doesn’t like women, particularly women with any kind of power. If she is, in fact, gay, who the hell cares? If she is gay and wants to come out of the closet, she will. On the other hand, the White House didn’t tiptoe around the question – they very decisively said that she was not gay. I don’t think they would have taken that bold of a stand if she was. Odds are that she is just a woman that concentrated on her career and never met anyone she wanted to marry.

    Andy needs to STFU and go back to searching for Trig’s biological mother.

  83. 83
    carlos the dwarf says:

    @trollhattan:

    I like the way you think.

  84. 84
    mai naem says:

    I don’t think its any of my business but I just don’t think she’s gay. It’s just a gut feeling. I just think she’s one of those almost asexual kind of people. The vast majority of people aren’t like that so it looks odd to them but I’ve known a few people like that. I also am annoyed by the double standard yet again – David Souter didn’t have to face this crap(BTW I think of David Souter in the same asexual mold.)

  85. 85
    Martin says:

    Well, Sully’s latest brain-fart on this topic is that Kagan probably is gay and that Obama is extremely shrewd to keep it secret to avoid the wrath of the Christianists.

    Sully really needs to learn how to calm down and compose his thoughts before running off in 9 different directions at once. I guess this means that the fundies rank higher than closet gays on his wheel of disgust, though.

  86. 86
  87. 87
    Martin says:

    @trollhattan: Ambers is almost as erratic at Sully, though on completely different topics and in different ways. He’s been having a fairly decent run lately, mind you.

  88. 88
    silentbeep says:

    What disturbs me most about Sully’s current obsession is that I have seen him give nary a thought to Elan Kagan’s own personal decision about this, and yes, her own agency – as if she doesn’t have any in Sully’s mind! As far as I know, she has never once said “yes, I am a lesbian.” So, this is her choice whether or not to discuss her own sexuality, whatever orientation it may be, this is not up to the White House to decide this for her and it hasn’t decided it for her. The White House said she wasn’t gay, probably because she isn’t and she probably gave them the blessing to go ahead and say that ’cause it’s probably true – the reverse “yes, please lie for me and tell everyone I’m straight” is absurd, but even if it was a lie so?! Not everyone is ready to be outed Andrew, and it’s not your job to balance other people’s emotional “checkbook” as it were. It angers me that he is showing absolutely no respect for this woman’s own decisions regarding whether or not to make her own personal announcements about her own sex life.

  89. 89
    Mark S. says:

    Souter is a lifelong bachelor. Did Sully ever demand to know about his sexual orientation?

    ETA: i see mai naem brought up Souter first.

  90. 90
    kay says:

    Why just her?
    Now he has to go after the whole federal judiciary, and Congress. I’d bet cash money some number are gay.
    It’s part of his transparency initiative, like that wacko demand for medical records, with Palin. He’s very civic-minded.

  91. 91

    @mai naem: Huh. That’s an interesting position. I have known a few asexuals, and it’s very possible. Or she could just be more interested in her career than in sex in general.

    @T.R. Donoghue: Or maybe she’s bi! Don’t leave out the bisexuals! Those are the only three possibilities he sees? What a limited mind Sully has.

    @Mark S.: Also a very good point. Sully really has problems with strong women (except, for some reason, Thatcher).

  92. 92
    Splitting Image says:

    @Nate Dawg:

    Not to defend Sully on this one, but she is a lesbian, John. It’s not a secret to anyone who runs in Harvard circles. Obama most certainly knows, as does Sully. (Hence his flat rejection).
    __
    I don’t think it’s problematic why she’s not out—she doesn’t want to be, for career reasons—as is her prerogative.
    __
    I wonder if her partner (a lesbian as well) could ask her if she knows if she’s gay or not.

    At my last job, it was no secret at I was gay. My co-workers made up their minds and couldn’t be dissuaded. If I have to choose between assuming that Kagan is gay and assuming that a lot of people in “Harvard circles” enjoy some mean-spirited gossiping, I’ll have to assume the latter.

    Also, keep in mind that these people you refer to are latte-sipping elitists who don’t understand much about ordinary Americans. How are they supposed to know what signs point to someone being gay.

    Also also, if “it’s no secret to anyone who runs in Harvard circles”, then she’s out of the closet. If I’ve told everyone at my place of employment about my sexuality, then who am I actually hiding from.

    The fact that people are insisting “everyone knows” the truth about Kagan while maintaining she is “in the closet” – which is more or less the case Sullivan is making – is all the evidence I need to assume Kagan is straight and no one has any evidence to contradict that.

    If she gets caught later on with a young blonde luggage handler from rentgirl.com, you can say “I told you so”. I won’t hold my breath though.

  93. 93
    Sebastian Dangerfield says:

    @twiffer:

    So far as I can tell, cuz (1) homeschooled plagiarist Ben Domenech proclaimed, from his well deservedly obscure wingnut-welfare hole, that it’s widely known around a university he never attended that she’s gay; (2) she’s portly and a bit butchy looking; and (3) she’s not married to a man. It is facked up beyond belief that some whispers that may or may not have been heard around Harvard, plus some stereotypes, add up to GAY, GAY, GAY …. MUST BE OUTED among the terminally confused Sully, some stupid gay-rights group, and the right.

    I think Obama could have done much better and wish he would have picked, say, Daine Wood, but this shit is just depressing.

    I should add that equally depressing is the crazy-fast-and-furious pushback the White House did against the rumor, which basically treated being rumored to be gay as a scandalous “charge” that must be refuted without even a token ‘not that there’s anything wrong with it.’ Depressing all around, actually.

  94. 94
    silentbeep says:

    @mai naem:

    Right. You know there are some people in this world that really are almost asexual. Rare it seems, this is true, but this is a possibility for sure. Some people really don’t really want to date and aren’t really into sex with anyone regardless of gender – it’s a pity that Sully can’t even recognize this simple fact of humanity.

  95. 95
    wrb says:

    Sully, from T.R.’s link:

    But by remaining silent and ambiguous on this, the Obama peeps can either depend on the whole thing going away – or wait for some kind of outing, and capitalize on the inevitable sympathy that would prompt among senators, and make her confirmation a shoo-in

    Jesus fuck he’s delusional.

    Little does more harm than an idiot trying to do good.

  96. 96
    silentbeep says:

    @Sebastian Dangerfield:

    “I should add that equally depressing is the crazy-fast-and-furious pushback the White House did against the rumor, which basically treated being rumored to be gay as a scandalous “charge” that must be refuted without even a token ‘not that there’s anything wrong with it.’ Depressing all around, actually”

    I have to agree with this. The fact that they couldn’t even say the token “not that there’s anything wrong with that” was awful – so I have to give Sully credit for pointing that out least (even though he’s crazy in general about this issue over all).

  97. 97
    mark says:

    @Nate @Comrade Kevin: I work from time to time with a guy who teaches at Harvard and have a good friend who got her phd there, so I did me some sleuthing. Yep, Nate’s gay. Everyone knows it. Open secret.

  98. 98
    Maude says:

    Does anyone find this very offensive?
    Ms. Kagen is nominated for the Supreme Court.
    Sully is totally disrespectful toward her.
    It is none of his business.
    Who the hell is he to demand that Ms. Kagen do anything of the kind?
    Sully has personal issues that he is projecting onto Ms. Kagen.

  99. 99
    mr. whipple says:

    How are they supposed to know what signs point to someone being gay.

    I saw yesterday that she likes to smoke an occassional cigar.

    Surely this is proof of something.

  100. 100
    trizzlor says:

    A bit off-topic, but the developments in the British election are what cost Sullivan the last of his credibility for me. He spent days and days writing about Cleggmentum, the rEvolution of the Tories, and of course lessons that the US parties must learn from this. Usually he did this below links to a dynamic poll of the three parties which shifted wildly and often contradicted the narratives in the same very post. And after all of this speculation, Clegg ends up losing seats and Sullivan, rather than re-analyzing his position, simply shrugs it off and starts on more tireless cheerleading of some coalition or another.

    This is the country of his birth, whose politics he claims to be intimately familiar with and yet his blatantly dreamy speculation was completely at odds with the reality. I like the Dish as a sort of humanoid Memeorandum, but I no longer see any reason to trust Sullivans “instincts”.

  101. 101
    demo woman says:

    Enquiring minds want to know what Cheney and Scalia did on the hunting trip. It’s hard to decide who’s the biggest dick also too.

  102. 102

    @silentbeep: Does anyone have a link to the actual statement? I want to know if it was just factual or if there was an undercurrent of apologia about it. If it’s the former, I can see it as just supplying info to the question. I mean, hell, Sully himself has asked the WH about it. He just refuses to take their answer at face value.

    @mark: Funny as hell. Thanks.

  103. 103
    aimai says:

    @dmsilev:

    Damn, I turn away to watch Fight Club and do the *&^% laundry and dmsilev beats me to the punchline.

    aimai

  104. 104
    Comrade Kevin says:

    @Maude: As someone said above, Sullivan has problems with women who are not Margaret Thatcher.

    @mark: haha!

  105. 105
    Alex S. says:

    @Litlebritdifrnt:
    @mcd410x:

    Wasn’t Harriet Miers supposed to be a closet lesbian, too?

  106. 106
    JMY says:

    @silentbeep:

    So what they didn’t add that? Whether or not she is gay doesn’t matter in the long run, but the fact that this is an issue is absurd because it is distracting. This is about who she is as a professional and how that will translate to the SC. To constantly speculate about whether she is gay or not is deeply offensive. If she wanted people know she was gay, she would have done it. It’s as if Sullivan is implying that because she is gay and not coming out the closet, she is not suited to be on the SC.

    If the WH strongly denied it, then I’m pretty sure that she told them that she was not gay. I don’t think Obama would care if she was or not, but I do feel that he didn’t want her sexual orientation to distract from her qualifications. But unfortunately, it has.

  107. 107
    silentbeep says:

    @asiangrrlMN:

    “He just refuses to take their answer at face value.”

    Yeah, that’s what rankles me about this. He has not evidence that she is a lesbian none, other than what? she’s not married, doesn’t really date and is kind of “butch” seeming? [/sarcasm]

  108. 108
    Mark S. says:

    It would be better for Obama to provoke such an outing from his “left”. That would allow senators to rally around the closet their generation cherishes and defend a person from “charges” that invade her “privacy.” Win-win, right?

    This is what Sully thinks 11-dimensional chess is. I also liked this:

    the Obamaites, revealing their usual tone-deafness on gay issues, never asked and blundered into this.

    Because people love it when you ask them their sexual orientation at job interviews.

  109. 109
    freelancer says:

    Go find someone who is either a student, recent graduate, worker, or connected alum at the Harvard Law School. Befriend them.

    Yes, just go befriend them. “Hello, may I befriend you?”

  110. 110
    Zifnab says:

    @John Cole:

    She might very well be gay.

    I’d say it’s highly unlikely, but stranger things have happened.

    /taps toe in the restroom

  111. 111
    silentbeep says:

    @JMY:

    Because the insinuation is that being gay or lesbian is some horrible, awful thing that has to be denounced as strongly as possible, that is why. The rest of your comment I agree with btw.

  112. 112
    kay says:

    To me, this is like the “there will be no Protestants left on the Court!” commentary.
    It just sort of sits there. What is anyone supposed to say or do about that? He should just abandon this now. It’s a non-starter, like the religious head-counting.

  113. 113
    Trinity says:

    @freelancer: I was “befriended” once. Should have pressed charges.

  114. 114
    R-Jud says:

    @trizzlor:

    A bit off-topic, but the developments in the British election are what cost Sullivan the last of his credibility for me.

    I started seriously paying attention to politics over here about two years ago, and I’ve noticed that Sullivan always just repeats the conventional wisdom currently circulating in certain segments of the UK press: usually he toes the Times’s line, but sometimes the Telegraph’s. And occasionally, he quotes the Spectator. These are all Tory-lovin’ outlets.

  115. 115
    Midnight Marauder says:

    @silentbeep:

    I have to agree with this. The fact that they couldn’t even say the token “not that there’s anything wrong with that” was awful – so I have to give Sully credit for pointing that out least (even though he’s crazy in general about this issue over all).

    To be fair, I really don’t have a problem with this response from Anita Dunn, former White House communications director, to the initial CBS News “report”:

    “The fact that they’ve chosen to become enablers of people posting lies on their site tells us where the journalistic standards of CBS are in 2010.”

    Notice that they called Pete Domenech (and by association, CBS News) an outright liar. And someone like Dunn is not going to use such strong wording unless that approval came from the top.

    I don’t think the White House takes that kind of strong stance on the issue unless they have an explicit blessing from Kagan to do so. In which case, the discussion should be over.

  116. 116
    jenniebee says:

    For the Bear of Very Little Brain? Pooh-yellow, of course.

    Or poo-yellow. Whichever.

  117. 117
    Martin says:

    @freelancer: You know, there’s an app for that.

  118. 118
    taylormattd says:

    Oh come on people, this one is easy.

    John, you need to turn your website flannel for this one.

  119. 119
    Poopyman says:

    BTW- Does anyone know what color I am supposed to turn my webpage for this crisis?

    Black and white, because Sully’s goal in life is to reduce his world down to one that’s in those two, toneless colors.

  120. 120
    Pete says:

    Yep. Sully’s going to be insufferable the next few weeks/months. His current hobbyhorse is that she’s the new Martha Coakley (not his words, but if you read his latest screed that’s what he’s driving at).

  121. 121
    Poopyman says:

    @taylormattd: Oooh! Taylormattd, “The Color Flannel” was my favorite movie!

  122. 122
    Martin says:

    Ok, this page is now getting ads for Gay Asian Singles. I blame, well, everyone, with a double dose for posts 42, 55, 66, 91, and 102.

    I’ll spring for tunchware if someone can make ads for Gay Asian Singles and Pitchfork Emporium show up on the same page.

  123. 123
    licensed to kill time says:

    @taylormattd: PLAID flannel!

  124. 124
    twiffer says:

    @Mark S.: interesting. so this:

    the Obamaites, revealing their usual tone-deafness on gay issues, never asked and blundered into this.

    strikes me as odd. to me, not asking “are you gay” = “who the fuck cares who you fuck”. so, buy not paying attention to sexual orientation, one is somehow being tone-deaf to gay issues? how? isn’t the entire point that no one should care, because it isn’t anyone else’s business?

  125. 125
  126. 126
    Joseph Nobles says:

    Michael Medved told me on the radio going to work that Kagan likes to smoke the cigars and will probably be on the cover of Cigar Aficionado if she’s sworn in. It was in the middle of him ranting about how elitist she is, so I think that was supposed to be evidence of that. Nobody tell him about the Limbaugh centerfolds in CA.

    RS: There is more to that Evolution ad than you can believe. Google AEA and True Republican Pac. Shit, Alabama crazy.

  127. 127
    taylormattd says:

    @Poopyman: Mine too. Oprah was great in that one. Likely because of her secret lesbian wife, Gail.

  128. 128
    Poopyman says:

    @Martin: Thank FSM it wasn’t just me! I’m 0 fer 3 in that demographic.

  129. 129
    D-Chance. says:

    If Kagan could only grow a beard…

  130. 130
    Face says:

    I saw yesterday that she likes to smoke an occassional cigar.
    ……
    Surely this is proof of something.

    /furiously scans UrbanDictionary for meaning

  131. 131
    Silver Owl says:

    I don’t recall anyone asking if Justice Robert’s boffed his wife regularly as a job requirement.

    It’s a pitiful day when jumping into someone’s sex life is now part of the job interviewing process. Well except for white conservative men. The juvenile mentality and sole focus on sex is nauseating.

  132. 132
    Poopyman says:

    @taylormattd: Wait, wasn’t that the movie with the McKenzie Brothers?

  133. 133
  134. 134
    cyntax says:

    Obviously since the asian gay singles pop-ad comes up on this thread, this must mean that Elena Kagan is gay. It’s right out there for everyone to see.

  135. 135
    silentbeep says:

    @Midnight Marauder:

    “I don’t think the White House takes that kind of strong stance on the issue unless they have an explicit blessing from Kagan to do so. In which case, the discussion should be over. ”

    You are right the discussion should be over. Still don’t agree with the way they did that though, the weird “lesbian is bad” insinuation is still there in my mind though. I don’t think is the worse thing ever that the WH has ever done, not by a long shot (I’m pretty much an O-bot) just think their strong pronouncement could’ve used some nuance, that is all. I don’t really think they are against lesbians, I just think it was a misstep and should be called out at the very lest.

  136. 136
    demo woman says:

    @RS: Thank you! I needed a laugh.

  137. 137

    @Martin: Wait a minute, so you’re blaming me? OK. Straight straight straight Asians straight no gay here. Better?

    @Midnight Marauder: This was my interest in what the WH actually had to say. If they are commenting strongly, whatever that means, because of the rumors without any whiff of apologia, then I have no problems. I actually don’t like the ‘not that there’s anything wrong with it’ line tacked to the end because it sounds apologetic.

    I read the part about the WH attacking CBS, and I got that they (the WH) was mad about CBS printing rumors. Such a distraction.

  138. 138
    MTiffany says:

    I’m gay and I don’t think the LGBT community ‘deserves’ a ‘representative’ on the Supreme Court any more than any other defineable group does. There should be no more a ‘gay’ Supreme than there should be a ‘black,’ ‘latino,’ ‘woman,’ ‘protestant,’ ‘jewish,’ ‘purple,’ ‘wiccan,’ ‘tone-deaf,’ ‘anosmiac,’ ‘paraplegic,’ or even ‘midget stripper’ Supreme. The legal opinions of the majority of these people is infallible by fiat. That’s not something you want to dick around with on the basis of identity-fucking-politics.

  139. 139

    This is the price an American pays for not being married in politics. I don’t know and it would not matter to me.

    I will say that after watching her speak on the clips last night on TV, I find her extraordinarily likeable. If this is part of her persuasive magic, I felt it.

  140. 140
    mark says:

    Update on Nate Dawg. Possibly not gay. Something about goats. Harvard gossip is so hard to parse. Sorry everyone.

  141. 141
    Midnight Marauder says:

    @twiffer:

    to me, not asking “are you gay” = “who the fuck cares who you fuck”. so, buy not paying attention to sexual orientation, one is somehow being tone-deaf to gay issues? how? isn’t the entire point that no one should care, because it isn’t anyone else’s business?

    I think the oddest thing from that Sullivan post is this comment:

    There are three possibilities, it seems to me, behind the kerfuffle over Elena Kagan’s emotional orientation. The first is that her orientation is heterosexual and she is merely a dedicated career person who never had time for a date…
    __[…]
    The reason I doubt the first is that the administration had a clear opportunity to say so yesterday and punted.

    Que?

    “The fact that they’ve chosen to become enablers of people posting lies on their site tells us where the journalistic standards of CBS are in 2010.” — Anita Dunn, former White House communications director, on April 16, 2010, in response to reports that Elena Kagan was a closet lesbian.

    Asked why the White House pushed back so aggressively when CBS News published a piece on its website (CBS appears to have pulled the piece) that said Kagan, if confirmed, would be the country’s “first openly gay justice,” Gibbs said it was not an issue to the president. [emphasis mine]

    The second comment was from yesterday!

    I think that’s a pretty clear rebuttal from the administration, and quite illuminating to their position on the matter.

  142. 142
    SRW1 says:

    @Nate Dawg:

    It’s kind of frustrating…makes me wish she’d get outted so ya’ll would think twice about dismissing gay people’s “inside info” in the future.

    Seriously? You want to insist on someone ‘getting outed’ — mind you getting outed, not coming out him/herself — just because you can’t stand your ‘inside info’ not being trusted. You actually think that’s a good enough reason?

    Methinks you got a little bit of growing up to do, son.

  143. 143

    @silentbeep: I didn’t get that from reading the comments, but I also think they are damned if they do, damned if they don’t. Oh, hell. I don’t know. Fuck.

  144. 144
    flukebucket says:

    @JMY:

    At least with this nomination, we know that, as a skinny black man, Obama has a thing for big white women…

    Does the Urban Dictionary have a name for that?

  145. 145
    Midnight Marauder says:

    @silentbeep:

    Still don’t agree with the way they did that though, the weird “lesbian is bad” insinuation is still there in my mind though. I don’t think is the worse thing ever that the WH has ever done, not by a long shot (I’m pretty much an O-bot) just think their strong pronouncement could’ve used some nuance, that is all. I don’t really think they are against lesbians, I just think it was a misstep and should be called out at the very lest.

    The White House Press Secretary said yesterday that Kagan being the “first openly gay [Supreme Court] justice” was not an issue for the President of The United States.

    I don’t think you even need nuance when you spell it out that explicitly. Really, there can be no real confusion on the White House’s position on this issue:

    It doesn’t matter to them.

  146. 146
    les says:

    Stolen from Sadly, No!:

    Andy neglects to mention that his statement that he finds “coercive exposure of details of people’s private sex lives to be appalling and cruel” might be based on his own experience rather than on some purely objective policy concern.

    Written by Andy in connection with explaining why Kagan must be outed.

    Which of course defines Andy’s entire “philosophy.” His picture adorns the definition of “solipsism.”

  147. 147
    SRW1 says:

    The thing that pisses me off about Sullivan’s grandstanding is that this seems to have become all about him being offended that someone doubts his gaydar. THAT CAN’T STAND.

  148. 148
    daveNYC says:

    Obviously since the asian gay singles pop-ad comes up on this thread, this must mean that Elena Kagan is gay. It’s right out there for everyone to see.

    Might just mean she’s Asian. Wonder if she’s in the closet about that too.

  149. 149
    silentbeep says:

    @Midnight Marauder:

    “it doesn’t matter to them”

    I don’t doubt that. But it matters to other people (not everyone obviously this blog is evidence of that). That’s why i think it was important to at the very least, at the very beginning of this thing to have said something like “not that there is anything wrong with that” (hopefully in a much more eloquent way than that!) It’s too late for that now, and it would be silly to go back, because I agree with you: this issue should be over. Giving at least a little bit respect to people that are in fact lesbian would be nice, as opposed to the almost “hell no she isn’t” pronouncement they gave in the beginning – i don’t think they meant to insinuate that being lesbian is “bad” I just think they could’ve been more eloquent about it. I believe words matter. Obviously, me and you are in disagreement about this whole issue, which is admittedly on my part, a small point. It’s really not that big a deal, but i don’t think things need to be a “big deal” in order to at least disagree about them. Oh well.

  150. 150
    Da Bomb says:

    @flukebucket:

    At least with this nomination, we know that, as a skinny black man, Obama has a thing for big white women…

    Does the Urban Dictionary have a name for that?

    Steve Urkel meets Chunky Reese Witherspoon

  151. 151
    beatty says:

    When I came out as a lesbo, I joined a volleyball team, and was completely outnumbered by the older lesbos in their ’40s and ’50s who had just come out as well. It was disconcerting to me, as I was 22. There’s been a huge revolution for queer people since the late 1980s, and while lots of advances have been made, people in their 50s did not have an easy time growing up as gay. So they tend not to pop out like younger folks do, and chill some. It can be pretty painful to see.

    Whether or not Kagan is a lesbian, and really, the word in all of Cambridge is that she is one, and it’s *not* based on any asshat from Balloon Juice calling us latte sippers (There are numerous bi and homo Harvard faculty – out and not so out.) – whether or not she is one, you guys cannot reasonably say, ‘So What?’ without completely not addressing what the loudmouth, bigoted religious parts of our country do and say about gays. Got Uganda? People want us dead solely because we identify as gay or lesbian or bi or transgendered. People in power…in our country. Not just some disturbed shmoe.

    Andrew Sullivan has waged many a battle in favor of normalizing the homos, to his great credit. I disagree with most of his politics. I think the Bell Curve was ruinous. I think his promotion of that nut Betsy C…during the Clinton healthcare fainting spells was abhorrent. I understand his argument about trying to out Kagan since Obama *is* basing his decision to nominate her on her biography, but I don’t agree with it.

  152. 152
    kay says:

    @silentbeep:

    I don’t know. If we assume a couple of things, that their response was approved by her, and they had said something like “not that’s there’s anything wrong with that”, knowing what we know about media, wouldn’t it have continued?

    I guess my question is, does she have a right to make this be about her, professionally? Can she exert that much control? I think she does, and can. It’s simply not relevant to the position. She hasn’t done anything to put it in play, either. She hasn’t made a marriage a central part of her professional life (John Edwards) or taken any phony family values stand (Sarah Palin), or any of that.
    She’s simply not saying. I want to give her that. I think people deserve that, unless, as I said, they make it an issue, and put it in play.

  153. 153
    JMY says:

    @silentbeep:

    I agree, but I don’t think that was the intent to come across that way. I think they came out strongly that way to protect the nominee, even though at the time she wasn’t the nominee, but the front-runner. With how strongly they responded, you knew she would be picked. I think that’s why the question of her being gay came out because people knew she would be picked.

  154. 154
    JMY says:

    @flukebucket:

    LOL, I dunno, but being an black man, there is that stereo type that lingers, but the funny thing is, it’s actually true to some extent.

  155. 155
    kay says:

    @silentbeep:

    And what if there’s another person, or persons, involved here? What then? Do they have any say in what’s revealed, or debated?

  156. 156
    Midnight Marauder says:

    @silentbeep:

    Giving at least a little bit respect to people that are in fact lesbian would be nice, as opposed to the almost “hell no she isn’t” pronouncement they gave in the beginning – i don’t think they meant to insinuate that being lesbian is “bad” I just think they could’ve been more eloquent about it.

    I understand where you’re coming from. I think my biggest difference is that for the Press Secretary to say that being the first openly gay Supreme Court Justice is not a big deal to the President of the United States speaks exponential volumes about where this country is right now, and the progress we will continue to make. I don’t think you deliver a more powerful rhetorical blow to the forces of bigotry and ignorance than by saying, flat-out, that the issue they’ll go to the hill and die on is totally and wholly irrelevant. It don’t get more forceful than that to me.

    Granted, Gibbs could have dressed up the wording a bit more, but again, that’s not really the style of this administration so far. Understated, yet firm. That’s kind of their M.O.

    @kay:

    I guess my question is, does she have a right to make this be about her, professionally? Can she exert that much control? I think she does, and can. It’s simply not relevant to the position.

    Again, this is what it really boils down to. I doubt the White House would have taken the strategic approach they did out of the gate if that was not how Kagan wanted them to play it. And it’s not like she’s some stranger to President Obama or his administration; she’s been there from the get-go. I think it’s pretty clear that regardless of her sexual orientation (or lack thereof, even), she never wanted to make her confirmation hearing about that. Because she didn’t view it as pertinent.

    People are twisting themselves in a lot of knots trying to overlook that fact.

  157. 157
    KS in MA says:

    @silentbeep:
    “kind of “butch” seeming? [/sarcasm]”

    Exactly. She should have a great figure, great fashion sense, and be, you know, “pretty.”

    The stereotyping is appalling.

  158. 158
    kay says:

    @Midnight Marauder:

    I think Andrew Sullivan, like a lot of conservatives (we found out in Sotomayor) have trouble with the difference between biography and privacy. Sotomayor’s biography was important because she overcame some hurdles, in getting where she got professionally. We didn’t discuss her romantic life.
    Kagan can have a personal life and a professional life. People can have that.
    I’m actually afraid of the freaking reality-show monster-people we’ll get in public office if we insist on making them tell us everything.

  159. 159
    silentbeep says:

    @kay:

    Do you mean if Kagan approved the initial WH “denial” comment exactly the way it was put? I think that would be kind of sad actually (not deplorable, just yeah, sad). To me it’s sad, because in my mind, there is nothing wrong with the WH saying something along the lines of “for herself personally Kagan is not gay, not that this is something horrible to be anyway” or hopefully, something else more eloquent than the way I just put it! Additionally, you know, I agree with you that this is not one’s business but her’s, I think what Andrew is doing re: this issue on his blog is ridiculous and I co-sign what John Cole said in this initial post. So, in the main, I’m largely in agreement with most commenters here.

  160. 160
    kay says:

    @silentbeep:

    I think the White House (unfortunately, in my view) have reached a point where they have very little respect or trust for media, and they knee-jerk “shut it down!” almost obsessively.

    I agree with them, to an extent (health care reporting was my big bitch: it sucked) but I think that relationship is broken, and they probably have to fix it. A Presidency is not a campaign. They were great at going around the press in the campaign, and I was cheering them on, but governing is different, and they need to be more forthcoming and less defensive. They’re going to have to develop some reasonable relationship with the press, if they’re going to govern. They’re defensive and stilted and Gibbs is outright hostile. I think Gibbs should cut out the too-cute snarky rejoinders and answer questions honestly and respectfully. It’s not healthy, and it makes me uncomfortable. We have the media that we have, and we don’t have another. “Deal with it”, I want to say.

    Anyway, that’s why I would be reluctant to attribute the response totally to Kagan. I think the WH is not being well-served by the people they hired who deal with media. It isn’t working, post-campaign, IMO.

  161. 161
    JMC in the ATL says:

    @Nate Dawg: So you’re the only LGBT that posts here? Don’t think so, compadre.

  162. 162
    Nate Dawg says:

    It’s a strange bit of homophobia on this thread where all the reasonable straight people are saying “it’s highly unlikely she’s gay”. How do you exactly rate the likelihood of one’s sexual orientation?

    Strange that the only people who think she’s gay are the ones who actually have no reason to be bothered by it–us gays–and yet we’re defending criticism that we’re somehow obsessed with what she does in her bedroom. As a gay man I can tell you–I’m not. She’s still gay though, and you straight people’s “hunches” about who is gay are pretty unreliable.

    Kevin, I’m not saying you SHOULD do my sleuthing for me. I know she’s gay. You do not know me and have no reason to believe me, but if you care to find out, you can poke around. It’s not hard to verify.

  163. 163
    celticdragonchick says:

    @Lord Omlette:

    Best of luck to your friend. It often takes a bit longer to come out to one’s self as transgendered than it does to come out as merely gay.

    I speak from personal experience on this one. :)

  164. 164
    ryan says:

    I’m a gay, and a lawyer, and I know I heard she was a lesbian long before there was any widespread talk about her being a possibility for the Supreme Court. And no, this wasn’t “gossip.” This was the happy realization that a semi-out lesbian (or so we thought) was being nominated as Solicitor General.

    There’s a double standard here that I wish more people in this discussion would see, and it’s exemplified by all of the “private life” and “none of my business” talk above. For the majority of you here, you’re “out” by virtue of normal conversation. You tell someone about your weekend, casually mention your wife, and everyone assumes you’re straight. For me, a gay man working at a law firm, I’ve had to make conscious decisions, with every person I meet in business, about how much of my personal life is going to upset the relationships I’m trying to build at work. And no, it’s not who I have sex with that I’m talking about. It’s who’s picture I have on my desk, who’s name is on my HR forms. Things like that. Luckily I live in a liberal city, but I still have to worry about these things more than you’d think.

    I’m willing to bet that this doesn’t happen to many of you, because you are oriented traditionally and get to be the happy recipient of many centuries-worth of heterosexual privilege. The media helps in this, as commenters have pointed out above, by bending over backwards to talk about every relationship, tryst, and breakup… unless it’s a gay one. Then, even if every actor and reporter in town knows about it, somehow it’s “bad” and the reality has to be hidden. This double standard affects many of us, I know it affects me, and many people don’t even see it.

    So if you wonder why it matters to some of us whether she’s out, its because the possible existence of a powerful out lesbian rising to such high station is exciting and hope-inspiring, and could help (in some small way) to bring about the societal change always wish would arrive faster. And it also matters because the possibility that she’s (re-?)closeting herself to get there would be heartbreaking.

    I haven’t been following Sully at all on this, though I suspect he’s in high drama queen mode at the moment, but let’s not assume that because of one asshat that this question doesn’t mean something for people. And, if you’re so lucky to have a relationship for which society shows you respect and provides you freedom, please don’t assume you know 100% what is or isn’t a “private matter.”

  165. 165
    Hob says:

    @Nate Dawg: Your browser-based gaydar is unimpressive, and also irrelevant since there are in fact other openly LGBT commenters here who don’t agree with you. But I guess if people forget to mark every one of their comments with a pink triangle, then your only option is to assume they’re just more of those stupid straight people who don’t know anything. What the hell? I’ve seen you around here before, I’m pretty sure you’re not that crazy Incog guy under another name, but this is fucking obnoxious.

  166. 166
    Sebastian Dangerfield says:

    @Midnight Marauder:

    It wasn’t just the Anita Dunn statement. The White House spokesman who complained to CBS, Ben LaBolt, framed the complaint as CBS’s having “made false charges.” The tone here is quite bad: A statement that someone is a lesbian is considered a “charge”; it certainly is possible to say something like: “This is really nobody’s business, as being gay or lesbian should not affect the consideration of a nominee, but because some pinheads are making a stink, we will make clear that she is not a lesbian.”

    At the time I also though that if she is gay — and someone has good evidence — the administration painted itself into a corner on this issue.

  167. 167
    kay says:

    @silentbeep:

    I don’t know how old you are, or if you were around, but the Clinton White House had this sort of over the top response to media.
    “NO, HELL NO!”
    It was justified, they were hounded and harangued by the press, beyond all reason, but it was like this horrible marriage. I don’t know which begat which. I don’t know if the press hounded the Clintons because the Clintons kept fighting the press, or what. They kept pushing and the press kept pushing back. It was a sick relationship. I feel as if the Obama WH is going in that direction, and it’s a shame.
    I blame Gibbs, because he strikes me as someone whose one and only tool is a hammer. He’s a warrior, even when it’s not remotely justified, and all he manages to do is draw attention to the most idiotic media memes.
    They should try just quietly and reasonably answering questions. That might be shocking enough to the general public, real and thoughtful answers to questions, and they’d start paying attention, and maybe the questions would get better.

  168. 168
    SRW1 says:

    @Nate Dawg:

    Jebus, thanks for confirming that your problem is the same Sullivan seems to have, namely that people disrespect your gaydar.

    Did it ever occur to you that people, straight or gay, who say that it doesn’t matter whether Kagan is gay or not do so because it doesn’t ‘bother’ them if she were?

  169. 169
    The Very Reverend Battleaxe of Knowledge says:

    Sullivan is a “serious conservative”, so naturally his pathologies have to be accommodated at all times.

    If Kagan is forced to drop trou while the whole Senate examines her vagina for teeth, and they don’t find any, then you’re OK with her, right Andy?

  170. 170
    binzinerator says:

    BTW- Does anyone know what color I am supposed to turn my webpage for this crisis?

    Haw! That was beautimous.

  171. 171
    maryQ says:

    Thanks for this, John Cole and all the Balloon Juice commenters. I strangely found myself seething with anger during the last 48 hours, as if Andrew’s opinion were something to which I needed to have an emotional reaction. THank you for helping me return to normalcy.

  172. 172
    maryQ says:

    Thanks for this, John Cole and all the Balloon Juice commenters. I strangely found myself seething with anger during the last 48 hours, as if Andrew’s opinion were something to which I needed to have an emotional reaction. THank you for helping me return to normalcy.

  173. 173
    roslyn frost says:

    http://www.unitedstatespolitic.....swers.html\n\r
    Unless she breaks the traditional silence of other recent Supreme Court nominees – something the nominee herself called for in 1995 – senators will have to vote on elevating Kagan to the nations highest court without finding out where she really stands on todays hot-button topics. Kagan was to start meeting with senators at the Capitol on Wednesday. Republicans are warning that a lack of candor could be detrimental to her getting bipartisan approval.

  174. 174
    Persia says:

    @August J. Pollak: Hell, how could we prove she was gay? You can never prove what’s in people’s hearts.

    But really, we could just copypasta “Sully’s a misogynist” from now until the confirmation, because that’s really what this is about.

Comments are closed.