Judge Taylor, a law professor, has been on the bench since 1979. She is decidedly not an amateur. So, how to explain her first-year failing-grade opinion? Regrettably, the only plausible explanation is that she wanted the result she wanted and was willing to ignore and misread vast portions of constitutional law to get there, gambling the lives and security of her fellow Americans in the bargain.
Well, that's the only plausible explanation only if you're afraid to question some of your own assumptions. The assumption that since the judge is a law professor and has been on the bench since 1979, therefore she is not an amateur, is ripe for examination. Could it be that this judge is another "Ward Churchill"? Graduated from high school and college without proper qualifications, admitted to law school without proper qualifications, hired by a law school or law firm without proper qualifications, and appointed to her judgeship without proper qualifications, all the while being lauded for her impeccable qualifications?
posted on 08/18/2006 7:58:39 AM PDT
by The Electrician
("Government is the only enterprise in the world which expands in size when its failures increase.")
To: The Electrician
That may be why she hijacked the Affirmative Action case.
posted on 08/18/2006 8:52:14 AM PDT
(History shows us that if you are not willing to fight, you better be prepared to die)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson