Do Judges Really Need our Protection?

As I was doing my daily scroll through top headline a couple, run by Yahoo News and the New York Times caught my eye. “Protecting Judges” was the one ran by the New York Times and “Judges Lack Protection Politicians Get” was the one ran by the national AP. It seems that in the recent climate of liberal lunacy, liberals are starting to sign America on board protecting their only asset, the Federal Judiciary. Since the evil “Red States” won’t elect them, and the “Conservative” media is out to get them, it appears that ideologically all they have is the Federal Judiciary. Well, I click on the link and discover what appears to be a new national crisis. Federal judges need bodyguards.
Nicole Ziegler Dizon, an Associated Press Writer (as if that means anything anymore, who isn’t?) states that while important “politicians, from governors and mayors down to California’s school superintendent and Chicago’s city treasurer, routinely travel with protection provided by the taxpayers,” judges often do not get that sort of protection. Well, this is a serious problem! Judges are getting “knocked off” left and right. This is a “disparity that is getting more attention after the killings of Lefkow’s (a U.S. District Judge) family members by a man upset over a malpractice case and the recent shooting rampage that began in an Atlanta courthouse and left a judge and three others dead.” Read that statement folks, death count equals judge one and others five. Never mind, just another liberal rant, but I was worried for nearly a minute or two. Dizon goes on to say that right now federal judges and other members of the bench generally get body guards only when there is a credible threat against them. Oh, so judges get protection when they need it? I thought there was a problem! Turns out that, like the media does, Dizon found someone, with a title, willing to support her claim, a Lt. Governor in Illinois thinks that this is such a problem that he gave up his bodyguards to be better used for judges. Where is Martin Scorsese for this picture of human sacrifice? I mean it can get downright dangerous in the hood around Springfield!
So, what is the solution? The government “should do more, from paying for home security systems to assigning psychologists to courthouses to identify people who might be dangerous.” Why didn’t I think of this before? Screw the military or bodyguards, if only we had government security systems and more psychologists, the world would be a safer place for us all. I have an idea! Why not just give every judge a .9mm? Even if you are a conservative who believes in guns causing more fatalities, first get some more information, second this works out perfectly even if they accidentally shoot themselves or get themselves killed. They are Federal Judges and they won’t be missed! Which leads me to my next point…
This problem points out a classic problem with liberal thinking, they do not understand a free market economy. The reason that taxpayers are willing to spend money on elected politicians is they represent our views and if they don’t we vote them out. The reason that taxpayers are not willing to spend money on judges is because they are not worth it. The less judges the better. Why? Because all they do is legislate from the bench and because all the Senate Democrats do is filibuster worthy judges, then why offer these scoundrels protection? Now don’t get me wrong, if a judge is threatened on something other than the fact that they are worthless and have legislated from the bench, then they deserve protection, and according to Dizon, they get it. Although, can I be the first to say if Judge Lefcow’s family had been killed over something like she ruled against baby-killers, then I doubt Dizon would have taken the time! When liberals want to protect something, everybody should be worried. They want to protect ANWR even though there is nothing there. They want to protect the taxing establishment, which should be a clue. They would rather protect baby seals then baby children not to even talk about a woman on a feeding tube in Florida! They even want to protect terrorist’s rights, which for the record don’t exist. I mean if they ever claim to protect me I am going to an exorcist. So, when they start wanting to protect judges, that should be our first clue that maybe there is something ideological to all this filibustering after all.
-Cincinnatus