Another Wacky Judicial Appointment

Socialized medicine--check.
Amnesty for illegals--next on the liberal agenda.

Could reparations be waiting in the wings of the radicals controlling our nation?

Read of yet another leftist judicial appointee, one who supports reparations. No surprise here. What a great way to redistribute wealth! Punish Americans for the actions of their ancestors. Makes sense in an Obama world.

Read from Atlas Shrugs:

Video: Obama Appeals Court Nominee, Goodwin Liu, Slavery Reparations Advocate

"Now that 20% of the national economy is in the hands of Obama, and illegal amnesty is the next Obama rout of fair elections (not to mention the back breaking entitlements that come with amnesty), there comes ..... slave reparations. What was once a joke is now your noose.

America elected this ..... What is most ironic is that slave reparations is racist. Robert Tracinski wrote:


'"Slavery was evil, but America atoned for it during the Civil War--a war that produced more than 600,000 casualties and ended slavery 137 years ago," said Robert W. Tracinski, also a columnist for Creators Syndicate. "For the descendents of black slaves to make demands for special privileges, compensation, and apologies from current Americans--who had nothing to do with slavery--is an ugly moral inversion that makes white Americans guilty because of their skin color."

Tracinski noted that the only standard that can be used to justify such an approach is racism--the idea that each member of a race is responsible for and can be blamed for the actions of every other member, that we are all just interchangeable cells of our particular racial collective.

"The proposed reparations consists of punishing whites and 'white-owned' businesses because they're white in order to reward blacks because they're black," said Tracinski. "The result of this approach is not racial harmony or a color-blind society, but racial warfare.

"The proper moral response to this kind of racial balkanization is to reject the notion of racial collectivism altogether and embrace the opposite principle: individualism. An individual should not be judged as representative of his racial group. He should be judged based on his ideas and actions. And he certainly must not be forced to pay for crimes allegedly committed by others, merely because those others have the same skin color."'


Video: Obama Appeals Court Nominee — Goodwin Liu – on Reparations for Slavery Verum Serum at tip Beth


'Flying a bit under the radar with all the focus on healthcare reform, late last month the President nominated Berkeley law professor Goodwin Liu to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Ed Whelan over at NRO is a definitive – and far superior – source for opposition research on Liu’s nomination, but suffice it to say that Liu’s views on the malleability of the Constitution, social and racial justice, and the role of the federal government in education, to name just a few issues, place him quite a bit left of center. Also, while Liu is only 39 years old and has very limited experience practicing law, he is viewed by many liberals as a strong candidate for a SCOTUS nomination down the road. So he is attracting a fair amount of attention.

With Professor Liu’s Senate hearing scheduled for this Wednesday (3/24), I thought I would look around and see if I could find anything which would shed some further light on his core beliefs which may affect his suitability for a lifetime judicial appointment. Lo and behold I came across a panel Liu participated on in 2008, discussing a PBS documentary entitled “Traces of the Trade: A Story From the Deep North“. I have not seen this film, but apparently it is the saga of a New England woman (the filmmaker) who had discovered that her ancestors were the largest slave-traders in U.S. history. In the clip I have extracted below, Liu is responding to a comment by fellow panelist James. A Joseph, the former Ambassador to South Africa, who had asserted that ”racial reconciliation” will ultimately only be possible if reparations are part of the discussion. Here’s Liu comment in response:



Partial Transcript:


'So what I would do is I think I would draw a distinction between a concept of guilt, which locates accountability in a sort of limited set of wrongdoers, and on the other hand a concept of responsibility. Which I think is a more broad suggestion that all of us – whatever our lineage, whatever our ancestry, whatever our complicity – still have a moral duty to…make things right. And that’s a moral duty that’s incumbent on everybody who inherits this nation regardless of whatever the history is.

And I think to add one more point on top of that, the exercise of that responsibility…necessarily requires the answer to the question, “what are we willing to give up to make things right?”. Because it’s going to require us to give up something. Whether it is the seat at Harvard, the seat at Princeton…or is it going to require us to give up our segregated neighborhoods, our segregated schools. Is it going to require us to give up our…money? It’s going to require giving up something.'


(Original video source is no longer available – full archived copy can be downloaded here.)

Go. Read the rest and puke."