On May 11, President Obama announced his nominee for the Supreme Court vacancy being left by Justice John Paul Stevens. As one would expect, due public assessment of Solicitor General Elena Kagan’s record, skills and political alignment ensued in the press and cyberspace. Among conservatives, certain red flags went up concerning some of her views.

While the nomination of a Supreme Court justice is a significant development – particularly in the case of this president – my reaction was what many might call blasé. Not a big yawn, but close. Kagan’s a typical big-government progressive, though perhaps not as far left as the president might have chosen. Other than that, she’s just another academic with no dynamic experience in her field.

As much as some on the right may recoil at the statement, Kagan’s lack of experience is, in the practical sense, something of a “so what?” After all: this is the administration with no experience in government or business that thinks the government ought to control business.

Someone as gifted as Elena could easily have settled into a comfortable life in a corporate law practice; instead, she chose a life of service.

– President Barack Obama, May 10, 2010

While Obama’s little speech was peppered with numerous references to instances wherein Kagan had facilitated the government’s protection of the American people from big, bad corporate abusers, my characteristically fertile mind cued in on Obama’s very liberal use of the verb “to serve” in reference to Kagan. It wasn’t the first time I’d heard him make such references.

The ultimate expose on the radical nature of our 44th president: “The Manchurian President: Barack Obama’s Ties to Communists, Socialists and other Anti-American Extremists”

The regular reader of this space will be familiar with my occasional use of popular culture analogies to clarify America’s various difficulties – so here’s another:

In the March 2, 1962, installment of the television series “The Twilight Zone,” the Earth is visited by an advanced race of beings who promptly solve all of humanity’s most pressing troubles. Thus, the visiting spacemen have no problem enlisting grateful humans to visit their home planet, supposedly an Edenic paradise.

The decidedly disturbing closing scene features a shipload of humans blasting off, as a horrified human translator unsuccessfully attempts to stop them. Turns out he had just finished translating one of the aliens’ tomes, a book entitled “To Serve Man.”

“It’s a cookbook!” he screams after them. It’s the last words they will hear from Earth.

My personal spiritual bent places a high value on service; then, there’s the writer in me that warily scrutinizes the words people use. In any case, that’s the way I have come to view politicians’ lofty claims of the high calling they claim to honor in service to the American people.

Truly, their idea of service far more resembles food service than civil service. Perhaps it is the profusion of misrepresentations and abject lies that our president generates that has precipitated my contemplation on this, though Obama is certainly not the only one currently employing that sort of rhetoric.

This comes to mind again when one considers the climate legislation (cap-and-trade) this administration and congressional leaders have in the hopper. It’s entirely baseless and has been advanced utilizing fear-based environmental propaganda, but it stands to benefit government hacks and their unscrupulous cronies in the private sector, while economically raping working Americans and small business – so it’s very much on the table.

Well, I think at a certain point, you’ve made enough money.

– President Obama, April 29, 2010

Well, Mr. President, at this certain point, a lot of us think the government has made enough money, although it obviously hasn’t come by that money honestly.

There are more levels on which I could expound upon our government’s oligarchic tendencies than we have space for here, but it has become apparent – at least to me – that wherever they intend to take us, they intend to arrive there long before November of 2012. Obama’s blatant reference to government having a right to determine how much money one ought to be allowed to make is a clear indicator of his communistic predisposition, but between the Americans who reckon he’s just a black Bill Clinton and our corrupt and seditious establishment press, he and Congress will continue to operate without apprehension.

If you help us make sure that first-time voters in 2008 make their voices heard again in November, then together we will deliver on the promise of change, and hope, and prosperity for generations to come.

– President Obama to supporters, April 26, 2010

I’d be interested in the president’s particular definition of “prosperity,” given the glimpse we’ve seen of our future vis-à-vis recent developments in Greece. The International Monetary Fund just approved a multi-billion dollar bailout package for that nation in the face of their economic implosion and mass rioting. That’s right; a bailout – for an entire nation – and it’s being partially funded through a shell game with American dollars via the Federal Reserve.

I wonder if Obama’s definition of “prosperity” is akin to Bill Clinton’s definition of the word “is.”

Note: Read our discussion guidelines before commenting.