It's worth reading up on the author. Normally, the messenger is less important than the message, but check this out:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Posner#Legal_positions

If you read his positions, he seems to me to take the worst elements of both political parties. He's like everything that's wrong with both views of government wrapped into one person.

He's described as generally right wing, but a moral relativist and moral skeptic. That means he believes right and wrong are relative to a situation (which invalidates the rule of law and turns it into rule of man) and moral skepticism (which means perhaps there are no moral truths or natural rights - which is frequently used as an apology for power and control). Helped set Bush Sr's antitrust policy. Opposes the right to privacy. Writes favorably of "efficient breach of contract" - that means breaking a contract if the damages are less than the losses of honoring it.

He argues that the ends justify the means vis-a-vis torture: "If torture is the only means of obtaining the information necessary to prevent the detonation of a nuclear bomb in Times Square, torture should be used—and will be used—to obtain the information. ... no one who doubts that this is the case should be in a position of responsibility." (note: I'm a firm believer that "ends justify the means" is always the route to totalitarianism and fascism, similar to how "we need to suppress free speech to protect the country" does too)

Finally, he both doesn't understand technology, and is proud to take a crazy stance on it: "Posner supported the creation of a law barring hyperlinks or paraphrasing of copyrighted material as a means to prevent what he views as free riding on newspaper journalism"

I'm generally somewhat liberal and modern - but the thing I respect most about American conservatives is that they draw strong moral stances and encourage them to be followed uniformly. Hell, they get a lot of their moral stances quite wrong in my opinion, but uniform enforcement leads to rule of law instead of rule of man. A stable, predictable, uniformly and equally enforced legal code is crucial to a healthy society. Moral relativism and moral skepticism are valuable in universities, but disastrous in courtrooms.

The author, Richard Posner, seems like an apologist for central power for any reason, and like a reasonably dangerous and bad person. So, the message deserves to be judged in its own right, but a quick understanding of the messenger might shed light on his motives.