Politics: NSA Wiretapping

Well a Federal Judge in Detroit ruled it unconstitutional. The Washington Post, in an uncharacteristic editorial from a left-leaning paper, thinks that the decision was a piece of crap.

The decision yesterday by a federal district court in Detroit, striking down the NSA's program, is neither careful nor scholarly, and it is hard-hitting only in the sense that a bludgeon is hard-hitting. The angry rhetoric of U.S. District Judge Anna Diggs Taylor will no doubt grab headlines. But as a piece of judicial work -- that is, as a guide to what the law requires and how it either restrains or permits the NSA's program -- her opinion will not be helpful.

Of course the New York Times loved her decision, mostly because it was little more than a sermon against George Bush from a black robed individual given her very own bully pulpit.

Via Physics Geek, Jesus Freak.

UPDATE: By the way, don't take this to mean that I like NSA wiretapping. I have my constitutional concerns like the rest of you. But a good decision should base itself in precident and the law. It should clearly spell out what the government is or isn't allowed to do, because these programs are ultimately more about saving lives. It should not be a political rant. Politics does not belong in a court of law.