9th Circuit Judge Unfazed by Storm Over Pledge Ruling [Archive]

View Full Version : 9th Circuit Judge Unfazed by Storm Over Pledge Ruling

oracle

07-01-2002, 08:16 PM

What an arrogant SOB...

9th Circuit Judge Unfazed by Storm Over Pledge Ruling (http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1024078927419)

Jason Hoppin
The Recorder (http://www.callaw.com/)
07-01-2002

Speaking from his 60-acre timber ranch in central Oregon, 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals Senior Judge Alfred Goodwin said Friday he wasn't surprised by the furor over his ruling on the Pledge of Allegiance.

Although Goodwin stressed that he couldn't talk about the merits of the case itself, he did share some of his observations about the flag, the politicians who have seized upon the controversial decision holding the use of the phrase "under God" unconstitutional, and the public's reaction to it.

"I never had much confidence in the attention span of elected officials for any kind of deep thinking about important issues," Goodwin said. "When they pop off after what I call a bumper strip headline, they almost always give a superficial response."

Goodwin, who turned 79 Saturday, was pilloried in the Senate last week as a "stupid judge" whose ruling was "just nuts."

He said he was disappointed in President Bush, who called the decision "ridiculous." "I'm a little disappointed in our chief executive -- who nobody ever accused of being a deep thinker -- for popping off."

...

Click here to read more (http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1024078927419)

DesertFox

07-01-2002, 08:21 PM

"I never had much confidence in the attention span of elected officials for any kind of deep thinking about important issues"

Our appointed officials are even worse, farthandle

"I'm a little disappointed in our chief executive -- who nobody ever accused of being a deep thinker -- for popping off."

I'M disappointed in the Chief Justice of the 9th Circuit -- who nobody ever accused of having a mind -- for pretending to think.

**DONOTDELETE**

07-01-2002, 11:09 PM

Wolf Counsel's definition of "deep thinker"--

A liberal who has managed to shove his head so far up his ass that he can feel his heart beat with each thought.

DoctorDoom

07-01-2002, 11:22 PM

Given the track record of 9CC, one must conclude that a lot of things don't faze him — reason, logic, common sense, the road rash on his knuckles...

Warlady

07-02-2002, 06:11 AM

Doc lololol

**DONOTDELETE**

07-02-2002, 08:10 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by oracle:
What an arrogant SOB...

9th Circuit Judge Unfazed by Storm Over Pledge Ruling (http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1024078927419)

Jason Hoppin
The Recorder (http://www.callaw.com/)
07-01-2002

He said he was disappointed in President Bush, who called the decision "ridiculous." "I'm a little disappointed in our chief executive -- who nobody ever accused of being a deep thinker -- for popping off." Click here to read more (http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1024078927419)<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

...

What a typical liberal response towards President Bush. Can't they come up with anything new other than the supposed lack of brain cell insults? Obviously not.

Well, we have one more individual to board on that slow boat to China with Alec Baldwin, Tom Cruise, and Barbara Streisand.

Conservababe

07-02-2002, 08:35 AM

The 9th Circuit Court is anti-American and should be done away with.

2nd_Amendment

07-02-2002, 08:52 AM

Speaking of deep thinking, this fellow doesn't exactly seem to be the sharpest *tool* in the drawer, now does he?

The_RANDy_Corporation

07-02-2002, 09:32 AM

His opinion is legally unsound and is obviously motivated by his own personal ethos (or lack thereof) and he has the utter temerity to cast aspersions on pols?

As I submitted before; time to change the constitution to elect these bozo federal judges rather than have them hand picked by squishy Presidents and a liberal Senate. And, how about an age limit. Should an octogenarian (almost) be responsible for handing down these edicts which so closely touch and concern our lives?? I think not.

Warlady

07-02-2002, 10:14 AM

RANDy I'm not sure we should have our judges in the corrupt campaign/lobby $$$ arena. I think that if they get reversed by a higher court a certain number of times they should be impeached and replaced. I also don't think that one man should be allowed to hold up Presidential nominees as Daschle is doing.

2nd_Amendment

07-02-2002, 10:29 AM

Appointing them is fine. For six years. After which they are removed from the bench and can either return to being attorneys or leave law altogether.

Daskid

07-02-2002, 10:36 AM

"I never had much confidence in the attention span of elected officials for any kind of deep thinking about important issues,"

Judge Goodwin may have a point; wasn't he chosen by one of those elected officials?

By their fruits ye shall know them. images/icons/cool.gif

ThomasIsUnderrated

07-02-2002, 04:26 PM

Frankly, I think that having judges serve for life is a great idea. Look at Rehnquist! What a great jurist! I don't think the answer to liberal judges is to limit the time that all judges can spend on the bench. You wouldn't have a lot of consistency that way. One judge comes in after six years and makes new rulings that go right over the old ones. I think we should focus on getting the Democrats out of the Senate and that would solve our problem right there.

Timberwolf

07-02-2002, 05:31 PM

From Neal Boortz... http://www.boortz.com/nealznuz.htm

I'm posting this in its entirety b/c it gets refreshed on Neal's site daily...

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>THANKS, I’M STILL ONE OF THE ONLY ONES OUT THERE...

...who thinks that the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals made the right legal decision regarding the Pledge of Allegiance. I dare say that about 99.9% of the people who have damned me to everlasting hell for my stance on this DID NOT read the actual court ruling, though I made it available. So … letters like this are particularly appreciated.

Neal … upon hearing what you had to say about the "Pledge" issue, I did exactly what you are always saying to do. I checked the facts for myself. And you know its quite interesting reading. But I found out that, of course, you were right again. When I told my wife she ask if I was against God. I showed and further explained the facts to her and even though she didn't want to admit it, the court was right. Thanks for making me think a little harder. And also for making me read something I've just taken for granted lately. I've decided to read the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights again., paying attention this time so I can see just how much the politicians have tried to or have done other things against the constitution. Think my congressman will listen?? For some reason I doubt it but it will make me feel better sending a letter to him.. By the way I live in Acworth.. Now do you think he'll listen?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Does ANYONE know what he's talking about?? Neal is one fairly conservative guy...for HIM to be saying this makes me wonder...

Warlady

07-02-2002, 05:36 PM

Boortz is not a conservative. He's a Libertarian.

Radical-Conservative

07-02-2002, 05:43 PM

Warlady

07-02-2002, 05:52 PM

I agree with Boortz on a lot of issues but he's dead wrong on this one.

Timberwolf

07-02-2002, 06:12 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Warlady:
Boortz is not a conservative. He's a Libertarian.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Not that well acquainted with him, WL...had heard he was a conservative talk show host, but was thinking that he HAD to be a libertarian after reading what he said...thanks for the clarification.

Warlady

07-02-2002, 06:48 PM

You're welcome T-wolf. At least he disagreed with Browne on the war on terror.