NYT: "Three Bad Rulings" by the Supremes
The New York Times editorial board made some staffing changes in early January 2007, and it shows. The editorials they've been producing since then are insightful, to the point, and they don't pull punches - especially as far as the Bush administration goes. The editorial pages may have been as strong prior to the changes, but I don't think so. This year, I've noticed a marked change in their willingness to make the right calls on difficult issues our representatives in Washington are dancing around, and I find myself nodding in agreement more and more frequently with their positions.
An editorial today on the latest rulings by the Supreme Court - titled "Three Bad Rulings" - is a case in point. The editorial condemns the 3 recent rulings on the First Amendment:
The Supreme Court hit the trifecta yesterday: Three cases involving the First Amendment. Three dismaying decisions by Chief Justice John Roberts's new conservative majority.Chief Justice Roberts and the four others in his ascendant bloc used the next-to-last decision day of this term to reopen the political system to a new flood of special-interest money, to weaken protection of student expression and to make it harder for citizens to challenge government violations of the separation of church and state.
Read it and weep. At least we'll be getting rid of Bush in 2008 (maybe sooner, if the Congress takes up impeachment); his Supreme Court appointments will be with us until, well, they die. And that is a tragedy, for this country and the world.
