Georgetown Law Professor Randy Barnett on Governor Palin’s Speech: “Reaganesque Even”

Conservatives4Palin.com ^ | 02/05/11 | Ian Lazaran

[nhwingut]

Georgetown Law Professor Randy Barnett e-mails Instapundit’s Glenn Reynolds his thoughts on Palin’s speech at the Reagan Ranch:

I DIDN’T SEE SARAH PALIN’S SPEECH LAST NIGHT, but Randy Barnett saw it, and emailed: “I must admit it was an impressive speech. The first I have heard her give since she accepted the VP nomination, only much better. Reaganesque even.” When Sarah Palin is getting that kind of praise from Georgetown law professors, it suggests that there’s something missing from the narrative.

[Padams]

“Reaganesque” is not usually a compliment from a law professor. Law professors are almost universally liberal. They are not Reagan fans (but maybe this guy is the exception).

[Shelayne]

PING for you!

[E. Pluribus Unum]

Sarah is inevitable and everybody knows it, especially the people who hate her or say she is unelectable because they prefer some RINO.

[bwc2221]

We need a conservative with courage. That limits the field to a select group like Sarah Palin, Michele Bachmann and Jim DeMint.

But, Sarah Palin stands head and shoulders among those people. She has been leading the fight against Obama and the liberals’ dream of socialist, sometimes single-handedly. No one did more to affect the outcome of the 2010 elections and alter the course of history than Sarah Palin.

[bwc2221]

We need a conservative with courage. That limits the field to a select group like Sarah Palin, Michele Bachmann and Jim DeMint.

But, Sarah Palin stands head and shoulders among those people. She has been leading the fight against Obama and the liberals’ dream of socialist, sometimes single-handedly. No one did more to affect the outcome of the 2010 elections and alter the course of history than Sarah Palin.

[Jacquerie]

I highly recommend his latest book, "Restoring the Lost Constitution." This guy is kryptonite to rats.

[mrsmith]

Alright- White House Counsel for Randy...
just until a Supreme Court slot opens up.

Vote Palin!

[Kent C]

> “Reaganesque” is not usually a compliment from a law professor. Law professors are almost universally liberal. They are not Reagan fans (but maybe this guy is the exception).

He is an exception and ‘Reaganesque’ is a compliment coming from him.

Perhaps more libertarian than for some here but check out his proposed amendments in his ‘Bill of Federalism’:

1.Disallow federal income taxes (i.e., repeal Sixteenth Amendment), as well as gift, estate, and consumption taxes; allow FairTax; require a 3/5 supermajority to raise or set new taxes
2.Set limits on the Interstate Commerce Clause
3.Disallow unfunded mandates, and conditions on funding.
4.Close a constitutional loophole that allows treaties to override established limits on power
5.Extend free speech consideration to campaign contributions, and to cover any medium of communication (including the Internet)
6.Allow a resolution of three quarters of the states to rescind any federal law or regulation.
7.Establish Term Limits for Senators and Representatives.
8.Provide the President with a line-item veto to balance the budget on any year in which it is unbalanced.
9.Reinforce the Ninth Amendment by specifying additional rights and by providing a process for any person to prove the existence of an unenumerated right.
10.Restrict judicial activism by mandating an originalist method of interpretation.

more here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Randy_Barnett

For those who like reading this sort of stuff - his “The Structure of Liberty: Justice and the Rule of Law” is a good read - easy to read, laid out well....

[rlmorel]

Thanks for the recommendation...

[Jacquerie]

Wiki states that he supports a constitutional convention.

I've read some of his works and never ran across even the sentiment for a CC.

Not saying it's wrong, just saying I'm very skeptical and it is after all, Wiki.

[Kent C]

There wasn’t any mention of it in the book I listed but that was about Justice in general. However, see his Wall Street Journal article a while back:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124044199838345461.html

“But state legislatures have a real power under the Constitution by which to resist the growth of federal power: They can petition Congress for a convention to propose amendments to the Constitution.”

And he offers a solution to the much proclaimed criticism of ‘runaway conventions’:

“Here’s how: State legislatures can petition Congress for a convention to propose a _specific_ amendment. Congress can then avert a convention by proposing this amendment to the states, before the number of petitions reaches two-thirds. It was the looming threat of state petitions calling for a convention to provide for the direct election of U.S. senators that induced a reluctant Congress to propose the 17th Amendment, which did just that.”

(..unfortunately, imo, that was a bad proposal - direct election of senators - but it still shows the process for a ‘good proposal’. )

[Wonder Warthog]

"“Reaganesque” is not usually a compliment from a law professor. Law professors are almost universally liberal."

Not necessarily. Even leftists agreed that Reagan had great communication skills. They hated him for it, but the more honest of them admitted the talent.

[onyx]

Thank you! This professor is the real deal.
God bless him!

[flowerplough]

Can’t see it. She’s usually merely Palinesque.

[Jacquerie]

Okay. Now it makes sense.