[tobyhill]

I just got finished reading the ruling and this judge states that she's sure the plaintiffs suffered damage but she can't award them anything other than the program being suspended because "they don't have standing". If these plaintiffs didn't have standing for damage awards then they shouldn't have had standing for the case to be heard in this judge's court.

[SE Mom]

Heard on FOX a few minutes ago that they're reading it over at the White House- and can't make heads nor tails of the ruling...said it's confusing and all over the place..

[half-cajun]

Even the legal commentator on CNN made your point. Evidently the gov't didn't even defend the case on the merits; it just argued that plaintiff's didn't have standing (or some other jurisdictional argument). The commentator was actually fairly amazed that the judge ruled on the merits and was even more amazed that she ordered an immediate halt to the program. Seems like this judge may come out looking like an idiot.

[sport]

Because this plays into the Democrat's agenda.

They want the Nation to be hit again so they can scream, "It is Bush's fault, he did not keep us secure!"

That is the reason they attack everything that President Bush does to prevent the international outlaws from attacking us again.

When we get hit again, not if we get hit again if the survivors do not take out on the alcu..... Well...

The alcu is doing everything in their power to ensure we get hit again, and again, and again.....