“I’m gonna probably regret this in a moment when I say this,” Pam Karlan says in this video uploaded back in 2007. Karlan, of course, is the openly gay Stanford Law School professor who’s said to be among President Obama’s top picks to replace David Souter on the Supreme Court. And in this era, the confirmation process includes web searches, which means anything ever recorded will probably enter the public fray. ESPECIALLY WHEN IT HAS TO DO WITH ABORTION!
Court of YouTube
Johanna
Why on earth should she regret this? It’s just another example of the extreme antiabortion movements misogyny – “women aren’t capable of making these type of decisions so let’s give them a pat on the head, tell them to be a good little girl and we’ll make them for them.” EVERY decision ANY PERSON makes in their life has the potential to be “regretted”. So, by that reasoning, no one should be able to make any kind of decision for themselves ever. So why should she apologize for speaking up for women everywhere? We are not stupid, second class or incapable of making decisions. Yes, choosing to terminate a pregnancy is a huge decision, but it’s an individual decision the government has no right dictating. Next thing you know it’ll be, “Well you might eventually regret doing x/y/z so they’re now illegal.” All this from the party that purports to be for “small government”, who is now trying to usher in Big Brother under the guise of saving lives.
In a word, bullshit
raquel
@Johanna: she may regret them because anything to do with abortion (or any touchy subject) can be a problem during the senate’s confirmation hearings. whether she is pro choice or pro life, it doesn’t matter…just that she has a position is enough for either side to argue about an obama “litmus” test
Oaklander
UGGG… Yes, you will regret it. I regret that you said it.
AlanInSLC
I regret the subject of abortion. Its just a drag.
Peter
Yes, she will probably regret what she said. The sad part is that she should not have to regret it. It seems like any thoughts about a subject that has to do with the “bible people” must be according to their thinking; not rational thinking.
rick
if you don’t have a uterus then you do not get any imput into the abortion issue. it should be decided by women and women only.
Oaklander
@rick: That’s not the topic of discussion. But thanks for playing.
roger
prospective justices who are stupid enough to say “i’m going to regret saying this”, but then go on and say it (in the case mentioned here, and with sonia sotomayor in relation to the power of appelate courts), are WAY too stupid to be on our supreme court, whatever their positions are on the matters at hand.
in the youtube age, it is IGNORANT to know that you’re being recorded, acknowledge it, and then plow ahead because you’re speaking to a friendly audience in the room.
yes, pam, you’ll regret that even if you might be right.
HYHYBT
@rick: Judging by your name, you yourself probably don’t have a uterus, so by your own logic you’re in no position to decide who gets a voice 🙂
But Oaklander is right. It’s not really the topic anyway.
@roger: “I’m going to regret saying this, but…” could just be acknowledging that she knows it will come back to her later. It doesn’t necessarily make her stupid for thinking it needed to be said anyway.
BrianZ
I see absolutely nothing to regret here.
Prospetive justices who aren’t afraid to speak the truth as they see it and do so in a public fashion might actually be a refreshing change. *gasp* We might actually get what we think we are getting from a justice once they are seated on the bench.
All these douchebags who run around thinking the nasty shit but knowing enough to hide it until it’s too late are the ones we need to worry about. All the politicians who run to each special interest group and promise the moon, knowing their intentions are to sell them down the river at the next special interest stop are the ones we need to be leary of. All of the people who make excuses for the prior two groups, we sure as hell need to be scared of because those are the idiots holding the rest of us back.
Mike Barton
@roger: I. Love. Her. Her analysis of the decision proves her to be insightful, while her statement shows she is aware of the sensitivity of the topic. I don’t see her as ignorant, rather as an intelligent person capable, willing and in possession of the cajones necessary to address the topic should she be called on the carpet for it.
Konrad
Seems like standard issue pro-choice opinions. Nothing remarkable.