<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: If This Is True</title>
	<atom:link href="http://bluecrabboulevard.com/2006/08/22/if-this-is-true/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://bluecrabboulevard.com/2006/08/22/if-this-is-true/</link>
	<description>Summum nec metuas diem, nec optes - Marcus Valerius Martialis</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 19 Apr 2012 09:00:56 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.4</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gaius</title>
		<link>http://bluecrabboulevard.com/2006/08/22/if-this-is-true/comment-page-1/#comment-17987</link>
		<dc:creator>Gaius</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 27 Aug 2006 02:12:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bluecrabboulevard.com/2006/08/22/if-this-is-true/#comment-17987</guid>
		<description>It is not a personal contribution - do you not see the difference?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It is not a personal contribution &#8211; do you not see the difference?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: fletch</title>
		<link>http://bluecrabboulevard.com/2006/08/22/if-this-is-true/comment-page-1/#comment-17985</link>
		<dc:creator>fletch</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 27 Aug 2006 01:50:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bluecrabboulevard.com/2006/08/22/if-this-is-true/#comment-17985</guid>
		<description>&lt;?xml version=&quot;1.0&quot; encoding=&quot;utf-8&quot;?&gt; &lt;!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC &quot;-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN&quot; &quot;http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd&quot;&gt; &lt;html xmlns=&quot;http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml&quot; lang=&quot;en&quot; xml:lang=&quot;en&quot;&gt; &lt;head&gt; 	&lt;title&gt;Untitled document&lt;/title&gt; 	&lt;meta http-equiv=&quot;Content-Type&quot; content=&quot;text/html; charset=utf-8&quot; /&gt; &lt;/head&gt; &lt;body&gt; &lt;p&gt;gaius- &lt;em&gt;Did she approve giving money to the ACLU in the current year? I&#039;ll repeat... Should Justice(s) Scalia or Thomas (or even possibly, hopefully Kennedy!) be allowed to make a &lt;strong&gt;current&lt;/strong&gt; &#039;personal and private donation&#039; to the Federalist Society?...or, would they then be forced to &quot;recuse&quot; themselves whenever the FS even files an &quot;amicus curiae&quot; in support of one side of some pending litigation?&lt;/em&gt; I think this is an important (and interesting) question--- Do the &quot;Supremes&quot; -- or any other &#039;judges&#039;-- have the same 1st Amendment(free association/political advocacy) rights as the rest of us peons? (And, &lt;strong&gt;who&lt;/strong&gt; actually makes this decision?)&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;(Edit to close open tags)&lt;/p&gt; &lt;/body&gt; &lt;/html&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>< ?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?> < !DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd"> <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" lang="en" xml:lang="en"> <head> 	 	<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8" /> </head> <body>
<p>gaius- <em>Did she approve giving money to the ACLU in the current year? I&#39;ll repeat&#8230; Should Justice(s) Scalia or Thomas (or even possibly, hopefully Kennedy!) be allowed to make a <strong>current</strong> &#39;personal and private donation&#39; to the Federalist Society?&#8230;or, would they then be forced to &quot;recuse&quot; themselves whenever the FS even files an &quot;amicus curiae&quot; in support of one side of some pending litigation?</em> I think this is an important (and interesting) question&#8212; Do the &quot;Supremes&quot; &#8212; or any other &#39;judges&#39;&#8211; have the same 1st Amendment(free association/political advocacy) rights as the rest of us peons? (And, <strong>who</strong> actually makes this decision?)</p>
<p>(Edit to close open tags)</p>
<p> </body> </html></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Flopping Aces &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Judge Taylor Participated In $45,000 Donation To The ACLU</title>
		<link>http://bluecrabboulevard.com/2006/08/22/if-this-is-true/comment-page-1/#comment-17592</link>
		<dc:creator>Flopping Aces &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Judge Taylor Participated In $45,000 Donation To The ACLU</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Aug 2006 05:33:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bluecrabboulevard.com/2006/08/22/if-this-is-true/#comment-17592</guid>
		<description>[...] Blue Crab Boulevard [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Blue Crab Boulevard [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gaius</title>
		<link>http://bluecrabboulevard.com/2006/08/22/if-this-is-true/comment-page-1/#comment-17588</link>
		<dc:creator>Gaius</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Aug 2006 04:38:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bluecrabboulevard.com/2006/08/22/if-this-is-true/#comment-17588</guid>
		<description>Did she approve giving money to the ACLU in the current year? That is the problem, not past ties.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Did she approve giving money to the ACLU in the current year? That is the problem, not past ties.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: fletch</title>
		<link>http://bluecrabboulevard.com/2006/08/22/if-this-is-true/comment-page-1/#comment-17586</link>
		<dc:creator>fletch</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Aug 2006 04:25:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bluecrabboulevard.com/2006/08/22/if-this-is-true/#comment-17586</guid>
		<description>After the sentence: &quot;These are all questions that Iâ€™m not sure if Iâ€™m comfortable w/ the answers the govâ€™t will provide.&quot;---  

&lt;b&gt;insert&lt;/b&gt;(&quot;See McCain-Feingold&quot;)---</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>After the sentence: &#8220;These are all questions that Iâ€™m not sure if Iâ€™m comfortable w/ the answers the govâ€™t will provide.&#8221;&#8212;  </p>
<p><b>insert</b>(&#8220;See McCain-Feingold&#8221;)&#8212;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: fletch</title>
		<link>http://bluecrabboulevard.com/2006/08/22/if-this-is-true/comment-page-1/#comment-17585</link>
		<dc:creator>fletch</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Aug 2006 04:21:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bluecrabboulevard.com/2006/08/22/if-this-is-true/#comment-17585</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;This really crosses a line if the allegation is true.&lt;/i&gt;

Un&lt;b&gt;sightly&lt;/b&gt;?  Yeah.  Un&lt;b&gt;ethical&lt;/b&gt;?  I really don&#039;t think so...

Consider Ruth Bader Gainsburger&#039;s connections to the ACLU--  should she have recused herself from &lt;b&gt;every&lt;/b&gt; &#039;civil liberties&#039; case that came before the court?  

The first &quot;trackback&quot; mentions Alito, (the &quot;Vanguard&quot; thing I assume- I didn&#039;t &lt;b&gt;actually&lt;/b&gt; &#039;click thru&#039;.)  admittedly &lt;b&gt;not&lt;/b&gt; the same thing by any stretch.  But, I&#039;m sure there are similar &quot;serious&quot; conflicts within the past histories of the current &quot;right-wing&quot; judges.  

Should Scalia or Thomas face &#039;recusal&#039; for &lt;i&gt;ever&lt;/i&gt; having donated any money to the &quot;Federalist Society&quot;?  How about a &lt;i&gt;current&lt;/i&gt; donation?  Would a restriction on their current donations be a &#039;deprivation&#039; of their rights?  Should employment and/or merely &#039;advocacy&#039;(definition?) be considered &quot;different&quot; than a &#039;cash donation&#039;?

These are all questions that I&#039;m not sure if I&#039;m comfortable w/ the answers the gov&#039;t will provide.

I am still a fan of &quot;(absolutely)minimal restrictions-(absolutely)full disclosure&quot;-- and let the chips fall where they will.

P.S.-- I also &lt;i&gt;still&lt;/i&gt; favor the &quot;she&#039;s just a partisan idiot&quot; argument...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>This really crosses a line if the allegation is true.</i></p>
<p>Un<b>sightly</b>?  Yeah.  Un<b>ethical</b>?  I really don&#8217;t think so&#8230;</p>
<p>Consider Ruth Bader Gainsburger&#8217;s connections to the ACLU&#8211;  should she have recused herself from <b>every</b> &#8216;civil liberties&#8217; case that came before the court?  </p>
<p>The first &#8220;trackback&#8221; mentions Alito, (the &#8220;Vanguard&#8221; thing I assume- I didn&#8217;t <b>actually</b> &#8216;click thru&#8217;.)  admittedly <b>not</b> the same thing by any stretch.  But, I&#8217;m sure there are similar &#8220;serious&#8221; conflicts within the past histories of the current &#8220;right-wing&#8221; judges.  </p>
<p>Should Scalia or Thomas face &#8216;recusal&#8217; for <i>ever</i> having donated any money to the &#8220;Federalist Society&#8221;?  How about a <i>current</i> donation?  Would a restriction on their current donations be a &#8216;deprivation&#8217; of their rights?  Should employment and/or merely &#8216;advocacy&#8217;(definition?) be considered &#8220;different&#8221; than a &#8216;cash donation&#8217;?</p>
<p>These are all questions that I&#8217;m not sure if I&#8217;m comfortable w/ the answers the gov&#8217;t will provide.</p>
<p>I am still a fan of &#8220;(absolutely)minimal restrictions-(absolutely)full disclosure&#8221;&#8211; and let the chips fall where they will.</p>
<p>P.S.&#8211; I also <i>still</i> favor the &#8220;she&#8217;s just a partisan idiot&#8221; argument&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steve</title>
		<link>http://bluecrabboulevard.com/2006/08/22/if-this-is-true/comment-page-1/#comment-17581</link>
		<dc:creator>Steve</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Aug 2006 04:00:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bluecrabboulevard.com/2006/08/22/if-this-is-true/#comment-17581</guid>
		<description>Out of hand wrong.......................

A federal judge rules against an intel program that we know has prevented terrorist attacks, and this judge if feeding cash to the ACLU who she rules in favor of and against us (all Americans)..............................

Crazy wrong.............................</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Out of hand wrong&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;..</p>
<p>A federal judge rules against an intel program that we know has prevented terrorist attacks, and this judge if feeding cash to the ACLU who she rules in favor of and against us (all Americans)&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;</p>
<p>Crazy wrong&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;..</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sister Toldjah</title>
		<link>http://bluecrabboulevard.com/2006/08/22/if-this-is-true/comment-page-1/#comment-17580</link>
		<dc:creator>Sister Toldjah</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Aug 2006 03:52:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bluecrabboulevard.com/2006/08/22/if-this-is-true/#comment-17580</guid>
		<description>&lt;strong&gt;Possible conflict of interest for Judge Anna Taylor Diggs (UPDATED)...&lt;/strong&gt;

Judge Diggs, you&#8217;ll remember, was the US District Court judge who last week ruled against the government&#8217;s NSA warrantless wiretapping of suspected terrorists.  The ruling was widely hailed by the usual suspects on the far left who are stil...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>Possible conflict of interest for Judge Anna Taylor Diggs (UPDATED)&#8230;</strong></p>
<p>Judge Diggs, you&#8217;ll remember, was the US District Court judge who last week ruled against the government&#8217;s NSA warrantless wiretapping of suspected terrorists.  The ruling was widely hailed by the usual suspects on the far left who are stil&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: The Political Pit Bull</title>
		<link>http://bluecrabboulevard.com/2006/08/22/if-this-is-true/comment-page-1/#comment-17578</link>
		<dc:creator>The Political Pit Bull</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Aug 2006 03:26:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bluecrabboulevard.com/2006/08/22/if-this-is-true/#comment-17578</guid>
		<description>&lt;strong&gt;Remember Vanguard?...&lt;/strong&gt;

Back when Justice Samuel Alito was merely a nominee to the Supreme Court, Democrats made issue of two things in particular in Justice Alito&#039;s past hoping to derail the nomination. The first was his membership in an organization called CAP......</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>Remember Vanguard?&#8230;</strong></p>
<p>Back when Justice Samuel Alito was merely a nominee to the Supreme Court, Democrats made issue of two things in particular in Justice Alito&#8217;s past hoping to derail the nomination. The first was his membership in an organization called CAP&#8230;&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

