August 19, 2006
Incompetent, Near Senile Judge Helps Terrorists
Susan Olasky of WorldViews.com writes,
"Democrats like Harry Reid were thrilled when Judge Anna Diggs Taylor found unconstitutional the NSA's use of secret wiretaps. The New York Times initially editorialized about the "careful, thoroughly grounded opinion,", but today the Times reports that legal scholars on both sides of the issue believe the opinion "overlooked important precedents, failed to engage the government’s major arguments, used circular reasoning, substituted passion for analysis and did not even offer the best reasons for its own conclusions." Yesterday Ann Althouse wondered why the judge wrote such a bad opinion: "It's hard to understand why a judge writing an opinion in such a high-profile case, dealing with such difficult law, would not put immense effort into creating an outward appearance of heavy scholarly effort and pristine neutrality. Does the judge lack the competence to do it?"
Lack of competence? Hell yes. When you can get the New York Times to rethink an anti-Bush action you know your opinion fell off the Earth. Sadly I think it will take something similar to Sept. 11 for the blue state dummies and their operatives to get a clue. Of course we pray that never happens but the ACLU and boobs like this judge invite it.
"Democrats like Harry Reid were thrilled when Judge Anna Diggs Taylor found unconstitutional the NSA's use of secret wiretaps. The New York Times initially editorialized about the "careful, thoroughly grounded opinion,", but today the Times reports that legal scholars on both sides of the issue believe the opinion "overlooked important precedents, failed to engage the government’s major arguments, used circular reasoning, substituted passion for analysis and did not even offer the best reasons for its own conclusions." Yesterday Ann Althouse wondered why the judge wrote such a bad opinion: "It's hard to understand why a judge writing an opinion in such a high-profile case, dealing with such difficult law, would not put immense effort into creating an outward appearance of heavy scholarly effort and pristine neutrality. Does the judge lack the competence to do it?"
Lack of competence? Hell yes. When you can get the New York Times to rethink an anti-Bush action you know your opinion fell off the Earth. Sadly I think it will take something similar to Sept. 11 for the blue state dummies and their operatives to get a clue. Of course we pray that never happens but the ACLU and boobs like this judge invite it.
