Above-it-all politico Joe Scarborough whinges that judiciary scandals never seem to describe the judge involved as "Clinton-appointed". Hmmm.....wonder why that is?

I don't know, Joe. Maybe it's because the most controversial activist judges come from appointments from Republican presidents? I'm just sayin'...

Of course, Scarborough and his sycophant Jon Meacham could just be pulling facts out of their whiney asses. I quote from Heritage.org :

In Log Cabin Republicans v. United States, the Obama Administration sought to win a policy victory by losing a case. By failing to adequately defend the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” (DADT) statute—a bipartisan act of Congress that provides that members of the military are subject to separation for engaging in a homosexual act, stating that he or she is a homosexual, or marrying a person of the same sex—President Obama is able to undermine or do away with a statute that he opposes. He can do so while shifting any blame for the change in policy to the courts. And a Clinton appointee, Judge Virginia Phillips, proved more than willing to accommodate the Administration, issuing an activist opinion that reads more like a press release than a legal judgment.

And from the NY Times:

The Senate on Wednesday found Judge G. Thomas Porteous Jr. of Federal District Court in Louisiana guilty on four articles of impeachment and removed him from the bench, the first time the Senate has ousted a federal judge in more than two decades. [..]
Mr. Porteous, 64, was appointed to the bench by President Bill Clinton in 1994 and has been suspended with pay since 2008. As a result of his removal from the bench, which took effect immediately, he will not receive his annual federal pension of $174,000.

Maybe Joe, you should focus on why there are so many judicial scandals surrounding Republican appointees next time.