In another trade of reasoned analysis for willing partisan ignorance, the “science, not ideology” crowd is contradicting itself again.
In reporting that quickly followed Tuesday’s ruling on the offshore drilling moratorium, MSNBC was on the case with allegations that Judge Martin Feldman had a conflict of interest because he reported owning Transocean stock in 2008. Borrowing words from the Judge’s ruling (pointed at Secretary Salazar’s Department of the Interior), MSNBC’s reporting is “capricious,” “driven by political or social agendas ” and “does not seem to be fact specific.”
That Secretary Salazar shares an analytical shallowness with MSNBC’s reporting is not surprising, given MSNBC and the Administration’s frequent collaboration. MSNBC’s attack on Judge Feldman was hairtrigger, poorly researched and quick to malign – all Obama fingerprints. Nonetheless, the silly narrative is being repeated across the leftosphere, despite that Judge Feldman’s ruling is cogent, logical and detailed. The same cannot be said for Salazar’s report or drilling ban.
Fortunately, normal people still stop, think and use good faith when hearing reports like Tuesday’s moratorium news. Good faith and good reporting alike mandate assessing the Judge’s ruling on its merits (actually reading it) and crediting a longstanding federal judge with the ability to manage potential conflicts of interest and a decision of recusal.
Read More: By Keith Riler, American Thinker