The talk around town is that the 2011 District Attorney's race will be Holly Carnright vs. John Sennett. Personally, I think Holly will and should be re-elected. He has proven himself to be a competent D.A. who is not interested in personal glory.
Sennett is a good attorney. I have faced him in Supreme Court and seen him at work. However, having listened to his statements on his WKNY radio show, I find him to be too far to the left to be an effective District Attorney. During one of his shows, he suggested that the Constitution was not binding on the law. He also stated that the United States is a socialist country regardless of the specific terms of the Constitution. I have no personal beef with Sennett, but I cannot support someone as far to the left as he.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
14 comments:
Yeah - Holly did such a great job on the jail investigation. A Good OLD boy!
Sennett is way too liberal for Ulster County. He fits in to New Paltz and Woodstock quite nicely but not the rest or sane part of the county.
SOME ONE TOLD ME THAT YOU DID INDEED COME UP AGAINST SENNET IN SUPREME COURT. HOWEVER i WAS TOLD THAT YOU BEAT HIM. YOU SAID HE IS A GOOD LAWYER BUT i BELIEVE YOU MUST BE BETTER .
4:34
The investigation was done BEFORE Holly became D.A. He gets neither credit nor blame.
4:48,
Yes, I faced him in court. I did win, but he was a worthy adversary. He is a good attorney. I just think he's too liberal to be D.A..
the jail investigation was done under Carnright. I was at the press conference.
11:09,
The jail investigation was assigned to Julian Screibman, the County Democrat Chairman by then DA Williams. Screibman goofed the indictment and the Judge dismissed it.
Tell me how that is Holly's fault. A person was assigned BEFORE his term who then screwed it up. If you want to point fingers, point it at the current County Chairman of the the Democrat Party!!!
I can give a few examples where the Constitution is not binding upon the law, and the Constitution is not enforced and in some ways actively subverted in the federal courts. "You are entitled to your own opinion but not to your own facts...
Funny you should point all that out,Rich, because that is exactly why I would support him...smitty
6:08,
I have no doubt that you can find examples of activist judges who think like Sennett and fail to follow the Constitution.
Nevertheless, the Constitution is the supreme law of the land. For a potential district attorney candidate to speak against the Constitution and insist that it is not the binding and supreme law of the land speaks volumes ... and not positively.
Smitty,
Why am I not surprised?
I reiterate based on the way you expressed the remark about the Constitution "not being binding on the law", the statement is literally true and also very much an idiomatic statment such that villification of anyone based on this one thing appears to me to be over-the-top.
One other thing:Holley Carnright is a former Civil Rights lawyer (in case the idealogues on here wish to paint him as so much different from the other current civil rights lawyer Sennett--someone on another blog stated he was another type of lawyer and perhaps that is right also but it is also true he did Civil Rights law prior to his election as D.A.). There is one indusputable difference we can point to, which is that Carnright certainly has more of a local background than Sennett, which is where I suspect the biggest basis of respective loyalties to each candidate naturally lie.
9:36PM Thank you and my how pedantic and provincial of you...smitty
Holley Carnright was never a civil rights attorney.
Post a Comment