Thursday, August 24, 2006
Anti-N.S.A. Ruling By Judge Connected to ACLU!
Imagine, if you will, a Conservative judge delivering a pro-gun ruling in a case brought by a pro-gun group of which he is a member? Would the left across the country just shrug their shoulders and utter a noncommittal "so what"? Or imagine the leftist outcry if a conservative judge who donated money to anti-abortion groups would have rendered a decision against abortion? Would the left simply move on without taking much notice? Or do you think there would be a tremendous wailing and gnashing of teeth by every leftist in the country?
Now, tell me. Have you heard a corresponding hew and cry about the leftist judge who belongs to a group that donates money to the ACLU and who was the Michigan judge who ruled against the Bush Administration's N.S.A. "wiretapping" program? Did you hear how she ruled in favor of that same ACLU when she belongs to a group that funds the ACLU?
Bet you wont see much about it. The New York Times published a piece about the story today, but spent more time pooh-poohing it than anything else.
Conflict of Interest Is Raised in N.S.A. Ruling
WASHINGTON, Aug. 22 — The federal judge who ruled last week that President Bush’s eavesdropping program was unconstitutional is a trustee and an officer of a group that has given at least $125,000 to the American Civil Liberties Union in Michigan, a watchdog group said Tuesday.
Not much outrage there. And they immediately followed that opening paragraph with one claiming that the story only came to light because of a "conservative organization" that dug it all up.
The group, Judicial Watch, a conservative organization here that found the connection, said the link posed a possible conflict for the judge, Anna Diggs Taylor, and called for further investigation.
Now, it is a fact that judges often do not recuse themselves when they should. It is true that this judge who ruled in favor of a group she has intimate connections with is not acting too far outside common tolerances. But, the question I have is where is the faux outrage on behalf of the MSM?
You just KNOW they would be losing their minds had this judge been a conservative, ruling FOR a conservative issue and being as closely tied to the plaintiff as this leftist judge is to a leftist group.
Ah well, it just shows MSM's bias in a brighter light!