Today’s Los Angeles Times carries an op-ed by Ian Millhiser (of the Center for American Progress Action Fund) that laments that the defeat of Goodwin Liu’s nomination supposedly means that “the Goodwin Lius of the future will be silenced” and that “the American people will be much poorer” as a result. Millhiser’s lament rests on his false depiction of Liu’s record, a record that I’ve extensively documented here.
In an effort to reach the same audience that Millhiser has misinformed, I’ve submitted a letter to the editor of the Times. Because some newspapers won’t publish letters that repeat material from blog posts, I won’t present my letter or its arguments here. But anyone inclined to credit Millhiser’s wild claim that Liu’s thinking on constitutional welfare rights is similar to Justice Scalia’s ought to read these two posts of mine. And anyone inclined to believe his assertion that Liu’s testimony against Justice Alito’s confirmation was “scrupulously accurate” ought to read this.
As for Millhiser’s criticism of Republican senators’ supposed inconsistency in opposing the filibuster of Bush 43 nominees while supporting a filibuster of Liu, I refer the reader to this recent post of mine.