DISQUS

The Washington Independent: Judicial Partisanship Awards

  • msaroff · 1 year ago
    Dr. Sunstein, while I appreciate the work done here, I am more concerned about your other work, specifically that endorsing expansive views of surveillance and torture of detainees.

    Additionally, I think that your comments which seem to suggest that lawbreaking by Bush administration officials should be swept under the rug to the maximum degree possible are very troubling.
  • johnbo · 1 year ago
    Sunstein's cautious approach towards doing ANYTHING about the most criminal administration in modern American history is truly troubling and makes anything he publishes suspect. He, like the Democratic leadership in the House and Senate, seems prone to look the other way while the Imperial Presidency of George the Lessor ignores the laws and shreds the Constitution. We can be assured that the powers that run this country aren't loosing any sleep worrying about an Obama Presidency with someone like Sunstein as a close advisor. Look forward to more of the same old sh*t. Their campaign slogan should be "Change we can just dream about".
  • uncleernie · 1 year ago
    Funny how the well known fascists John (the enforcer) Roberts and Sammy (the coat-hanger) Alito both Smirky appointees were left off the list because they would skew the results toward a more honest article so I'm not surprised by the conclusion. I am surprised that Sunstein could get this nonsense published!
  • calljohnpeterson · 1 year ago
    Getting back to the article and point of the extensive research, I thought it was well done. No matter what your other views, the statistics appear overwhelming.
  • moondancer · 1 year ago
    While I am sure there is substance in you post, I can't concentrate on it as I seethe at your call for turning a cheek to the criminal and in my mind treasonous behavior of the Bush regime. To do nothing is to put your imprimatur on their misdeeds.
  • serf · 1 year ago
    The WSJ posted a guest opinion arguing that (non-conservative) judges have been activists. I tried to point out that the opinion lacked a factual basis and cited this page, twice. It has not been posted by the moderators yet. WSJ reserves the right to not post links to web sites with "objectionable conduct." Maybe that includes opposing views?

    see http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122108996856421...
  • KYJurisDoctor · 7 months ago
    Interesting, indeed, but probably not surprising.
  • ds · 7 months ago
    BULL CRAP