Re: Kagan Continues to Avoid Answering Nomination Questions

Kagan wrote in a 1995 law review article that "when the Senate ceases to engage nominees in meaningful discussion of legal issues, the confirmation process takes on an air of vacuity and farce."  This statement has been at the heart of Ed Whelan's criticism which I previously documented.  It has also lead Republican Senators to attempt to probe her views on the hot button legal issues of the day and to follow up when direct responses remained elusive. 

Well, apparently she has since changed her mind.

Kagan, the dean of the Harvard Law School, told the lawmakers she had endeavored to answer their questions but acknowledged: "I am . . . less convinced than I was in 1995 that substantive discussions of legal issues and views, in the context of nomination hearings, provide the great public benefits I suggested."

Is this what was meant by "change you can believe in?"

h/t  Crime and Consequences