There’s a silent battle on your computer screen. So much effort is being allocated to a single court ruling, so many opposing opinions, a poor fool like me can’t hope to find reality.
This week Blogtopia is divided (as usual) over the ruling of Judge Anna Diggs Taylor against the NSA goings-on. While the left is pumping fists in the air, perhaps prematurely, the right is on smear-campaign war-footing, as usual. My Righty-blogger friend, Leucanthemum, who also write for her town paper, tries to undermine the judgment against the NSA by playing it off as a childish whim. She points to a few like-minded "experts" to fuel her argument. One, the Volokh Cabal, makes extensive use of a posting by Orin Kerr, a law professor at George Washington University who writes a great deal to prove his point. He’s a professor, alright. After a ten-page soliloquy, he ends with:
Conclusion. Anyway, that’s my tentative take; I hope it’s helpful. It’s entirely possible that I goofed the analysis somewhere along the way; FISA, the AUMF, and Article II aren’t my area of expertise, so we should consider this post a work in progress. I look forward to comments — civil and respectful, please.
Another link points to a NY Times article (I didn’t know she reads such trash) also dissing the embattled Michigan judge, wherein Mr. Kerr is quoted again. The author, Ann Althouse, is another professor of law who, give Mr. Kerr more credentials that he is willing to admit to himself. Her point is the transparency of Judge Taylor’s bias within her ruling. Hmm, I’ve heard this before…
To further heat up the bile against her on the right, Gateway Pundit makes sure to mention her connection to Jimmy Carter. Surely a liability in the eyes of all repugnants. Further, he posts a picture of the good Judge to inform (subtly, I think not) the masses of exurbian xenophobes that she’s black while mentioning how she ruled in favor of the case, brought before her by the ACLU. To further aid the aforementioned masses, who may or may not have the patience to read while a good program is waiting on the tube, he emboldens a few choice lines to hammer his bias home.
Meanwhile, on the left of the spectrum, Glenn Greenwald has several interesting counters to the self-Righteous character assassins. Unfortunately for the Pundit, Glenn has serious street credentials. First, a primer on Polite Washington Discourse, and why the good Judge shattered them. Next, he posits Two Critical Under-recognized Points about Judge Taylor’s ruling. and , yep, the critics missed pointing them out. Then he Grades the Law Professors, and expects that apologies are due. I hope he won’t hold his breath. Finally, he berates the same NY Times article my friend found so credible.
I’d find more if I bothered, but why? Mr. Greenwald does such a good job holding up the left all by himself; few others could add more. the sheer volume of verbiage in the subject would keep me awake until New Years.
My point is so much is being said, mostly by hacks and ignoramuses (I’ll let you sort out who is whom) disguised as fact-writ-large, that the majority of us, who have an interest in this debate and no previous knowledge of the intricacies of the matter, cannot hope to gain anything useful. Is there anyone in America alive today who will not be affected by such a momentous decision? Even the young, who don’t like to think about our twisted politics, will have to live with the consequences of the Bush administration for decades. Just as we are all still paying out for previous administrations, left or right.
In an attempt to enlighten, the blogosphere obscures. So many voices, all whom are so sure of themselves, so full of themselves, who look so professional in their blog-templated finery. Because bloggers all love to string words together, and because they all believe themselves the only rational voice in Blogtopia, the uninitiated, the unwary and the under-informed are often victims of assumed credibility. The result is, of course, that a reader can only make time to read what is agreeable. As for sifting for the truth - what’s a soul to think?