A secret identity, here? Who'd'a thunk it?

But seriously, Phil, the noise machine is putting out the line for its attack on the judiciary, and you have dutifully picked it up, as you are supposed to do. If my recognition of that is condescension, well, so be it. Sorry it hurt your feelings.

Second, the remark about ruling by decree is only partly sarcastic. The Executive is already doing that in the name of national security, by declaring that some people are not entitled to contact with the outside world, let alone to a trial, because it says so.

If you had read all of the link you posted, you would notice that the author's point is aimed directly at judicial actions and judicial appointments. I will also point out that your remark, in the phrase you used for the link, is also part of the noise machine's line: that liberals use the courts to avoid having to win elections.

You think that judges are acting on their own personal ideologies? How do you explain that when so many -- perhaps a majority -- of the federal judges have been appointed by the Reagan and Bush I administrations? Of course, I can't speak to the ideological outlook of the state judiciary of MA, but aren't state judges elected there? They are in PA. How is an elected official not responsive to public opinion?

A gutted judiciary will do us no good either. Their job is to interpret the law, not to parrot the other two branches. If the legislatures don't like that, they can just enact laws that pass muster.