“Judge Alito’s record envisions an America where police may shoot and kill an unarmed boy to stop him from running away with a stolen purse … where a black man may be sentenced to death by an all-white jury for killing a white man,” Liu wrote. “I humbly submit that this is not the America we know. Nor is it the America we aspire to be.”Flowery? As Lou Reed once sang, "Vicious, you hit me with a flower...."
The testimony was “vicious, emotionally and racially charged, very intemperate, and to me it calls into question your ability to approach and characterize people’s positions in a fair and judicious way,” Kyl said.
Liu only acknowledged that this language was “unnecessarily flowery.”
१७ एप्रिल, २०१०
What Goodwin Liu said about Samuel Alito...
At his confirmation hearing, lawprof Goodwin Liu, nominated for the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, is being taken to task by Senator Kyl for what he said at Samuel Alito's confirmation hearing. (There is also talk of Liu as a future Supreme Court nominee.)
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
४३ टिप्पण्या:
I've listened to a few tapes of Liu by now. Guy loves the sound of his own voice. Loves his own ideas. Comes across as boring and condescending. Other than that a fine fellow.
The language Liu used was hyperbolic. Whether you agree or disagree with his view point, Alito does not warrant being painted in such a light.
Here's the phrase from the article that caught my eye:
Democrats argued that his credentials are unassailable—the son of Taiwanese immigrants, Liu graduated from Yale law school, was a Rhodes Scholar and is now a well-respected constitutional law scholar at the University of California Berkeley law school.
Is being the son of Taiwanese immigrants a "credential"? (Well I guess it is if you're going to be the only Asian-American on an appellate court.)
Considering these clowns see damn near EVERYTHING through a racial lens, his being of oriental descent is probably one of the most important 'credentials' to them.
Progressive definition of 'flowery language': "You found out what crap I actually said, so I'll excuse it by calling it 'flowery'."
How bright can this guy be?
He apparently thought his radicalism would remain buried in this day and age and thought it would be cool to omit it? Is he that clueless about this process?
Then he uses "flowery" to describe his Alito rant?
Admission of personal income tax irregularities in 4...3...2...
"where a black man may be sentenced to death by an all-white jury for killing a white man,” Liu wrote. “I humbly submit that this is not the America we know. Nor is it the America we aspire to be.”
What about an all-black jury sentencing to death a white man for killing a black man? Is that the America we know or aspire to be?
Liu should be disqualified for this racist, intemperate and frightening statement alone.
“I humbly submit that this is not the America we know. Nor is it the America we aspire to be.”
For Obama and his ilk the constitution is flawed,they know better and will "fix" it.
This country with Obama at the helm is in a world of hurt.
I have nothing against hyperbole and exaggeration when used at political rallies and the like. It can serve legitimate purposes, such as magnifying the otherwise perhaps tiny differences between two candidates. But the sort of language Liu used in Congressional testimony is just inappropriate for that forum. That is the place for measured, thoughtful words. That Liu didn't use measured, thoughtful words at the time suggests to me that he is not capable of doing so.
By the way, on a side note, I am so no longer impressed with the credential of being a "Rhodes Scholar." All of those I've ever seen who have gone into political life of any sort have been unbearably smug, condescending, and arrogant... and in the end not really all that bright, anyway (though certainly not stupid). I decided a year or two ago I will never again vote for any candidate who was a Rhodes Scholar.
I'm surprised Politico chose to specifically delete this rather topical "float" from Liu's parade of horribles:
"...where the FBI can install a camera where you sleep on the promise they won't turn it on unless they have to..."
Video. (Sorry about the ad.)
It's positively orgasmic for leftists, like this Liu creature, to fantasize a list of conservative depredations on their fictitious paradise.
"Liu only acknowledged that this language was “unnecessarily flowery.”
Liberals like to think that they emanate the odour of Sanctity whenever they open their mouths.
I think his "flowery" language smells more of a blooming Amorphophallus titanum.
Liu said: "...where a black man may be sentenced to death by an all-white jury for killing a white man..."
Consider the fact that the county in which I live happens to be about 95% white, 4% hispanic, and 1% black.
I've never heard of this happening in this county (we don't have many murders), but should a black man kill someone here, chances are, the victim will probably be white, and the jury will probably be all-white, simply because there aren't as many prospective victims or jurors of color.
AlphaLiberal, garage, Jeremy, help me out here -- what should the local prosecutor do in such a case? Should he recruit black jurors from a large city a few counties away, simply because they're black?
I'd really like to know.
Hey, look... in that old post the scent of the titan arum seems to have attracted Meade... or was it the scent of a woman?
Paladian:
That is atough question.Since Meade is a gardener so he liely knows what the heck you are talking about and he likes women.
For most Lefties, "the America we know" sounds a lot like the propaganda churned out by Walter Duranty to tell us how swell life under Uncle Joe was.
where a black man may be sentenced to death by an all-white jury for killing a white man
What would be the confirmation chances of a conservative judicial nominee who had previously decried an America "where a single black member of a jury can let a black man walk free for killing a white man"?
Who is talking about Liu as a Supreme Court nominee?
Being a Rhodes Scholar means never having to say your sorry.
It was vicious...but the left is morally superior and all knowing, so it's justified. :)
"Democrats argued that his credentials are unassailable—the son of Taiwanese immigrants, Liu graduated from Yale law school, was a Rhodes Scholar and is now a well-respected constitutional law scholar at the University of California Berkeley law school."
Yeah, that will go over real big in middle America today, LOL!
Sounds like he's going down, if the Dems didn't even have the guts to show up for support.
And I'm waiting for the Givans article mocking his children's clothes.
Still waiting for a liberal to answer my 9:51 question.
Ritzy? FLS? Anyone?
I know you're here, Ritzy and garage -- you've posted comments on other threads this morning.
Constitutional law scholar? Isn't that sort of the same position that Barack Obama held at Chicago?
I can only think of one Con Law professor -- and she's a full professor, not merely a lecturer or "scholar" -- that I'd trust in the federal judiciary. Make that two, if Con Law is Glenn Reynolds' specialty.
Kill The Pig is just flowery language. A judge needs to be able to form rules that let society settle differences under a sense of a just outcome. Marxist Revolution settles nothing. It REQUIRES the Party to steal, then to kill, and then to destroy as the sole method of settling differences. Underlying that attack mindset is the expectation in share in the loot. Everybody knows that is true after the twentieth century. So they have no excuses or second chances to explain it away and need to be fought as the smooth talking Marxist murderers and looters that they really are.
It's not hard to always say what you mean.
Namely don't pander.
I'd say Liu is pandering now, but either way it's disqualifying.
"Is being the son of Taiwanese immigrants a "credential"?
Well he came from a very distinguished family. I believe he is directly descended from General Taso.
If Hop Sing were awake he would say that is racist.
Who is talking about Liu as a Supreme Court nominee?
No one seriously believes that he would be offered, as Liu is on the far left. But that doesn't keep him from being on the wet dream list of liberals.
But how out of touch with mainstream America are Liu and the people that would love to see him on the Supreme Court (read: Dahlia Lithwick, the leftist Canadian citizen who writes about our Supreme Court)?
Pretty far out of touch, or as Jonathan Adler puts it, "these students (and Lithwick) are in a bit of denial about their place on the political spectrum. The Supreme Court is already slightly to the left of the American public on most major issues."
A conservative Supreme Court?
The biggest lie of liberals and the White House today.
If he is going to use "flowery language" when he gives testimony to Congress, as he did before, one can only conclude that he is using flowery language now when he tells the Senators that he will decide cases only on the law and the evidence, and that he will not insert his own personal political biases into his judicial decisions.
If he is undermining his own credibility before, we should not extend any credibility to him now, or in the future. And we should expect that, if he were to be confirmed, that he would again resort to the use of fact-distorting "flowery language" rather than merely objective and reasoned rulings on his part.
If this guy is destined for the Supreme Court, nominate him for Stevens seat. It may be awhile before there's another shot to get someone like Liu on there. Besides he'd be wasted on the 9th Circuit, such as it is.
Kyl is the dude that decided that American states couldn't make their own rules about internet gambling and that the great American Nanny State had to outlaw it at a national level. He deplores Federalism.
And Kyl is the consummate Republican establishment politician. If America is to become a better country, pathetic old fogies like Kyl need to be removed from office as the very first step.
Kyl's opinion of Liu means nothing, because Kyl is the most worthless piece of shit in the Senate right now.
Villainous old man wounds Major de Coverley in the eye with a flower
link
Kyl's opinion of Liu means nothing, because Kyl is the most worthless piece of shit in the Senate right now.
And yet the American people agree with Kyl about Liu.
One man's gold is by the moron mistaken for dung.
If Liu is so far out in left field and can't watch his words better during a confirmation for someone else, imagine the tortured reasoning crap he would write as a Justice. He should just become a fantasy writer - he's good at it and could make a lot more money.
Ann during Alito's hearings:
CNN reports:
Support for Alito's confirmation grew after widely televised confirmation hearings, the poll found. Before the Senate Judiciary Committee hearings, held January 11-13, 49 percent of respondents backed his nomination. In the poll released Monday, 54 percent expressed support.
The percentage of people who opposed his confirmation remained unchanged [at 30 percent] after the hearings, Monday's poll found.
That says a lot about the quality of the Democratic Senators' presentation at the hearings. They were not able to gain one percentage point of opposition. You'd think that many people would, without giving it much thought, support a President's nominee initially. The 49 percent figure going into the hearing may show that. But the hearings should have eroded that high level of support at least a bit, and surely, some of the 21 percent undecided should have taken the negative position. Yet the hearings won Alito 5 additional points.
Clearly, the Democrats' strategy was poor. But exactly why was it so poor? I've said before that I think it's a mistake to portray judicial decisionmaking as a political enterprise, which is what they did, leaving Alito to prevail by doggedly explaining legal doctrine in response to every attempt at an attack. I think people want the Court to decide cases based on the law and want to believe a judge can do that. If so, the Democrats' attack on Alito would look ugly and offensive.
"Words, just words?" So, is Liu saying that his words have no meaning, that what he said previously is of no import? Strange? OTOH, someone else in high federal office told us that campaign words are not important! So, maybe Liu is correct and we need to move on and allow Liu to further express himself. But in words?
Presuming Liu does get that seat, could this disregarding of his previous words raise some fascinating examples, possibilities, on appeals from his bench rulings!
Kyl's opinion of Liu means nothing, because Kyl is the most worthless piece of shit in the Senate right now.
And your opinion of Kyl is supposed to mean something given the "worthiness" of your comments here and on other topics??
Liu(ser): ...envisions an America where police...
Quick. Someone go look up what Ted Kennedy said about Robert Bork.
Sound familiar?
Bork Liu. Now.
I logged in to say what Palladian said at 9:40 but he said it better.
Bingo, Paul.
Compare Liu on Alito:
Judge Alito’s record envisions an America where police may shoot and kill an unarmed boy to stop him from running away with a stolen purse … where a black man may be sentenced to death by an all-white jury for killing a white man,” Liu wrote. “I humbly submit that this is not the America we know. Nor is it the America we aspire to be.
with Kennedy on Bork:
Robert Bork's America is a land in which women would be forced into back-alley abortions, blacks would sit at segregated lunch counters, rogue police could break down citizens' doors in midnight raids, schoolchildren could not be taught about evolution, writers and artists could be censored at the whim of the Government, and the doors of the Federal courts would be shut on the fingers of millions of citizens for whom the judiciary is—and is often the only—protector of the individual rights that are the heart of our democracy...
Wow, he's sort of a plagiarizer, too!
Palladian "I think his "flowery" language smells more of a blooming Amorphophallus titanum."
I was going to use the corpse flower idea when I originally wrote the post.
edutcher said...
For most Lefties, "the America we know" sounds a lot like the propaganda yada yada yada"
as the propaganda from the right sounds like Goebbels explaining why Poland is a pain in the ass.
Right wing propaganda seems to triumph in extremism...or haven't you noticed.
This man is clearly not a wise asian.
HDHouse said...
as the propaganda from the right sounds like Goebbels explaining why Poland is a pain in the ass.
Right wing propaganda seems to triumph in extremism...or haven't you noticed.
What I've noticed is that your derangement is directly proportional to you stupidity.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा