Thursday, August 17, 2006

Carter Appointee Proves that Billy was the Smart One

Both Powerline and the Gateway Pundit have great pieces on today’s appalling decision by the 6th Circuit Court’s Judge Anna Diggs Taylor, a 1979 Carter Appointee. The Gateway Pundit reviews some parts of her biography that didn’t make it onto her official court biography; like the fact that her two husbands have been very active in Democratic politics and that her first husband Rep. Charles Diggs, was “convicted of 29 counts of running a payroll kickback scheme in his office.” Her second husband was some sort of mucketty-muck in Carter’s 1976 campaign. The Gateway Pundit puts the entire affair into great perspective with this observation: “(s)o, in case you are wondering... Our national security was just decided by a liberal judge closely associated (married) to a scandal-plagued Democratic Representative and America's most liberal and worst president, Jimmy Carter.”

One Gateway commenter noted that the Judge had been divorced from the scandal plauged Rep. Diggs before the commision of his crimes. Among other things the Judge had worked in her husband’s office and likely knew something of his character; it may even be why they were divorced. I doubt that the relevant timing makes a difference to the argument that Mr. Carter was likely rewarding Democratic supporters with her appointment, that’s how it works here in Democratic Chicago and the federal judiciary has had its share of that.

John Hinderaker of Powerline notes that Judge Diggs Taylor was involved in a judge-shopping contriversy while on the federal bench in Detroit. Mr. Hinderaker also comments on the likely venue-shopping tactics of the ACLU, an organization that apparently believes that terrorists should have pretty much free rein here in the good ol’ US of A.

The specifics of the case are interesting as they rely on the balance of power between the executive and legislative branches. The unspoken specifics are also interesting as it has brought to the fore those naïve people who believe that wireless telephony is perfectly secure. It has also brought to the fore those who would argue that a rerouted phone call (a telephone number here in the US that is used to reroute a call to an overseas telephone number) is somehow protected communications. In that case we have reached a point where the “civil” or “human” rights of machines trump our right to protect ourselves and our nation. Thank you Mr. Carter.

At least Billy got paid.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home