US v. McGuire, No. 06-1166, (unpublished) affirms a post-Booker remand of a sentence (that is, his second sentence). On his second sentence, despite a stipulation, he only does a little better (25 years as opposed to 30 years). The First disposes of arguments regarding the “crack/cocaine differential” as “policy arguments” that are properly addressed to Congress (we all know that this means). The guidelines, it says, are an “important” consideration at sentencing, and since the court explained, at length just how bad a guy this was (in terms of 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(2)(A) , there was nothing unreasonably high about his sentence.