The comical indictments of Kagan’s nomination keep on coming.  Again, the National Review (don’t ask me why I read this stuff) reprints some Kagan criticism from Doug Johnson of the National Right to Life Committee:

Regarding Ms. Kagan’s specific views on the Court’s past abortion-related rulings, there is little on the public record.  But Ms. Kagan may have betrayed a possible personal animus towards the pro-life movement in a 1980 essay lamenting Republican gains in the 1980 election, in which she referred disparagingly to “victories of these anonymous but Moral Majority-backed [candidates] . . . these avengers of ‘innocent life’ and the B-1 Bomber . . .”   Was Ms. Kagan so dismissive of the belief that unborn children are members of the human family that she felt it necessary to put the term “innocent life” in quote marks, or does she have another explanation?

I think the National Review is having a lot of “success” digging up “troubling issues” on Kagan.  She should really be “worried.”  But why didn’t someone call out John Roberts (when he was a nominee) for his excessive use of semicolons, eh?!

-Michael