Patterico's Pontifications

6/23/2008

WSJ Op-Ed: “Smearing Judge Kozinski”

Filed under: Dog Trainer,General — Patterico @ 8:12 am

The Wall Street Journal has an opinion piece titled Smearing Judge Kozinski.

The letter from Marcy Tiffany referred to in the piece may be read here.

23 Comments

  1. You da man Patterico!

    Comment by daleyrocks (d9ec17) — 6/23/2008 @ 9:09 am

  2. Well Patterico, uncovering some highly dubious material in the Daily Dog Trainer has always been “all in the day’s work” for you. The Kozinski smear job was just run of the mine for the clowns down at the Chandler Edifice to Yellow Journalism. But I’m glad you’re keeping on them–and I suspect that Justice Kozinski and his wife are also happy as well. And so long as Tim Rutten remains on staff, you should remain “on call”.

    Comment by Mike Myers (31af82) — 6/23/2008 @ 9:52 am

  3. …”the case instead showed how easily privacy is breached online, how mainstream media botch a story, and how bloggers can redeem journalism by reporting facts.”

    Many congratulations for appearing in this great Op-Ed, Patterico. You certainly deserve the notice.

    My sincere thanks for consistently living up to the latter part of the quote (emphasis mine).

    Comment by EHeavenlyGads (f29174) — 6/23/2008 @ 10:50 am

  4. Congrats, Patterico. :)

    and I suspect that Justice Kozinski and his wife are also happy as well

    We can only hope that President McCain will make such a wise choice.

    Comment by bridget (add3eb) — 6/23/2008 @ 11:00 am

  5. bridget,

    What do you mean? Patterico for US Supreme Court?

    Comment by PCD (5c49b0) — 6/23/2008 @ 11:19 am

  6. Oh hell YES!

    Comment by Scott Jacobs (fa5e57) — 6/23/2008 @ 11:32 am

  7. Oh, I think there will be several retirements. More than enough to go around. ;)

    If you read the comment to which I was responding, Judge Kozinski was called “Justice” Kozinski, which is only applicable to those who are on the U.S. S. Ct. or those who are on the highest court in their state or jurisdiction. Ergo, my comment….

    Comment by bridget (add3eb) — 6/23/2008 @ 11:41 am

  8. I believe that Justice Stevens stated that he ‘knows the precise date’ that he intends to retire in an interview. ( http://www.volokh.com/posts/1168204363.shtml )

    To me, the obvious implication is 1/21/2009, when he can be certain that George W. Bush will not pick his successor. (The implication is, however, that Justice Stevens said the above in a joking manner.)

    Comment by luagha (5cbe06) — 6/23/2008 @ 2:05 pm

  9. Ditto EHeavenlyGads’ comment, and congratulations to Patterico on an excellent job. It doesn’t get any better than this.

    Comment by DRJ (81c148) — 6/23/2008 @ 2:43 pm

  10. Excellent journalism all around! Maybe one day LA Times reporters will have the insight to write such stories, that gets to the essence and past the temptation for a politically correct cheap smear. But I doubt it.

    Comment by Bradley J. Fikes (0ea407) — 6/23/2008 @ 6:10 pm

  11. The real point of this, was an attack on Judge Kosinki, practically the only sane judge on the 9th Circuit; by a vindictive legal gadfly, abetted by the LA Times, who did next to nothing with a similar parasite William Lerach, the poster boy for the trial bar.

    Comment by narciso (d671ab) — 6/23/2008 @ 6:35 pm

  12. Enough already! Patterico you promised the last post was going to be your last on this kosinki stuff. its clear there is nothing more we can glean out of this. Please keep your promise.

    Comment by love2008 (0c8c2c) — 6/23/2008 @ 6:58 pm

  13. I thought I said it was the last post I would publish about the material on the disc. In other words, I’m not going to keep dishing out posts detailing what was on his server. I’m done with that.

    But done with the Kozinski controversy? Nah. Not as long as there’s linkable stuff to discuss!

    Especially since you like it so much!

    Comment by Patterico (cb443b) — 6/23/2008 @ 7:06 pm

  14. He hasn’t gone back on his word, he’s just changed his commitment… :)

    Comment by Scott Jacobs (d3a6ec) — 6/23/2008 @ 7:07 pm

  15. Especially since you like it so much!
    Yeah, right.

    He hasn’t gone back on his word, he’s just changed his commitment…
    Leave Obama out of this Scotty! :)

    Comment by love2008 (0c8c2c) — 6/23/2008 @ 7:13 pm

  16. Love2008, since you’re here… that Presidential seal on the podium was one of the funniest things I’ve ever seen. Did you feel embarrassed for your candidate ? I’m not trying to egg you on. Anyone who’s voting for Obama probably won’t change their mind.

    Anyway, FINALLY the guy kept his promise to cross the aisle and unite people. Now we can all join hands and laugh together. It’s so crazy and he’s so naive… or arrogant… it’s like an SNL sketch! I’m sorry to see the thing go. It should’ve rolled off stage and hit Helen Thomas in the leg. It’s like he appointed himself without even one vote.

    C O M I C gold.

    Comment by Vermont Neighbor (31ccb6) — 6/23/2008 @ 9:49 pm

  17. Selected Not Elected, squared and cubed with super-high octane.

    Comment by Drumwaster (8ad883) — 6/23/2008 @ 10:52 pm

  18. Let’s not forget that Bush (43) had a similar seal gaffe, if I recall correctly.

    Though Obama’s use of the Latin “Yes we can” is particularly douchey and hilarious.

    Comment by Jem (4cdfb7) — 6/24/2008 @ 1:17 am

  19. Jem,
    I didn’t know about the Bush display. Maybe because This Campaign has the whole Savior baggage attached is why it was so funny. And Spike Lee’s prediction: America will know two phases… B.B. and A.B. I expected this wreck to smoke and burn a couple months from now, not this soon.

    Though Obama’s use of the Latin “Yes we can” is particularly douchey and hilarious.

    Laugh out loud funny.

    Comment by Vermont Neighbor (31ccb6) — 6/24/2008 @ 7:31 am

  20. “Yes we can” may be the most important phrase since “Got Milk?”

    Comment by Vermont Neighbor (31ccb6) — 6/24/2008 @ 7:35 am

  21. Not that I mind making fun of Barack I-Am-The-True-Possum Obama but how did we get here in only twenty comments? It usually takes eighty or so.

    Comment by nk (11c9c1) — 6/24/2008 @ 7:41 am

  22. #16
    Love2008, since you’re here… that Presidential seal on the podium was one of the funniest things I’ve ever seen. Did you feel embarrassed for your candidate ? I’m not trying to egg you on. Anyone who’s voting for Obama probably won’t change their mind.
    Just like you Vermont, I felt it was a little too cocky. One of the many reminders that Obama is capable of little foolish acts. He sometimes has the propensity to shoot himself on the foot. If he does lose this election it will be purely due to his making. Thankfully they seem to have heard what everyone (even their die-hard supporters) feels about it and removed it.

    Comment by love2008 (1b037c) — 6/24/2008 @ 8:17 am

  23. The whole thing was interesting. But a few too many of those ‘goofs’ and they won’t win over the independents.

    Anyway, this election for so many is about who not to vote for. I’m shocked to live in a time where people are taken by someone like this. Seriously; the flaws and mistakes in the guy’s DNA have me scared that he will win the anti-Bush vote in November. He doesn’t have a record to run on …

    Comment by Vermont Neighbor (31ccb6) — 6/25/2008 @ 7:39 am

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.3065 secs.