Gonzales Resigns | Drudge Retort

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush will likely nominate Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff to replace Alberto Gonzales as Attorney General, senior administration officials told CNN Monday.

politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com

"That way Bush can appoint Deputy Dawg or Harriet Myers or any of his other loyal, incompetent buddies."

Damn! I'm good, too!

At least the country's security would be safer this way, though our liberties would still be in doubt.

Even though he is an employee of the citizens? He can do whatever he want, and not have to worry about being held accountable? You do realize that this is America, right?

Posted by ness_gadol

I'm sure you were beside yourself when Clinton fired all of them, including the Attorney that launched the Rose Law Firm investigation, right?

"Active subversion in order to gain political power for one (1) group of Americans, at the expense of all of the USA, and those who depend on us for their defense against terrorism and tyranny!"

Nice Tadly!

I have yet to hear a better description of what Gonzales and Rove have been doing.

Even though he is an employee of the citizens? He can do whatever he want, and not have to worry about being held accountable? You do realize that this is America, right?

Posted by ness_gadol

Would you at least recognize that Presidents have in the past, including this one, fired multitudes of attorneys for no reason other then they felt like it.

Its a documented fact... if you could just realize that, I think we could make some headway here.

Politicising the Federal gub'mint.

Another fine product of the GOP.

I'm sure you were beside yourself when Clinton fired all of them, including the Attorney that launched the Rose Law Firm investigation, right?

Posted by wisgod

Wis do you expect an honest answer to this?

Scratch that... do you expect an answer at all?

Maybe Speedy just didn't remember where he worked?
And good call Bowa. I guess you can see into the devious mind of the Prez pretty well.

Politicising the Federal gub'mint.

Another fine product of the GOP.

Posted by Corky

Being hypocritical, SOP for the DNC

I'm sure you were beside yourself when Clinton fired all of them, including the Attorney that launched the Rose Law Firm investigation, right?

I was in 4th grade.

Well, you may have been partially right Bowa, but it doesn't sound like Bush is planning to fan the flames further

What could fan the flames more then nomination hearing on a new AG? I think the recess appointment is the way to go. It's not like the democrats are going to hate him even more then they do already. Their hate for bush is all tapped out already.

"Solicitor General Paul Clement will be acting attorney general until a replacement is found, said the officials who spoke on condition of anonymity to avoid pre-empting the announcement."

Of course, the replacement will be found on January 20, 2009.

maybe I am getting too cynical.

if you could just realize that, I think we could make some headway here.

I'm aware that firings are not unprecedented. There, you happy?

Your turn. Admit that turning the Justice Department into another tool of the president to pursue his own agenda is a bad thing.

And good call Bowa. I guess you can see into the devious mind of the Prez pretty well.

I don't think it was devious, it was the obvious move --canning Gonzo during the recess was politically the "path of least resistance"

I was in 4th grade.

Posted by ness_gadol

Does that prevent you from commenting on it now?

How about in 2001 when Bush fired around half, maybe more?

Rob,

Find us an organized effort to politisize Federal offices on the part of a Dem such as the one by Rove or Gonzo's actions.

No, huh?

Does that prevent you from commenting on it now?

No, but I tend to restrict my comments to things that I actually know something about.

I know, what a crazy concept, right?

I'm aware that firings are not unprecedented. There, you happy?

No, but its a start.

If they're not unprecedented then you have to calm down about them, and realize that is was not the firings that got the admin and more specifically Gonzales in trouble, but the unecessary coverup. Because, since they are not unprecedented, and they didn't get any president in trouble before then although you may disagree with what he did, its only bad in your head.

Admit that turning the Justice Department into another tool of the president to pursue his own agenda is a bad thing.

Posted by ness_gadol

Turning?! Turning?! How can you say in the first part of your post that the firing of US Attorneys is not unprecedented and then say that it is this Preisdent who is turning the DOJ?

If EVERY president before him has had the power to fire and appoint his own hand picked attorneys then the DOJ isn't turning into a tool for the president, it has always been one.

"I'm sure you were beside yourself when Clinton fired all of them, including the Attorney that launched the Rose Law Firm investigation, right?"

No, as Rob has pointed out, it is not unusual for an incoming President to clean house of USA's. Bush did it, Clinton did it, Bush I did it, and I assume Reagan before that, etc.

It IS unusual for a group to be fired during the administration and that is what set up the initial red flags. Then the fact that the Justice Department at first offered up a lame reason (when they didn't have to offer any reason at all), then retracted it, further raised suspicions.

Finally, Gonzales and other JD officials testifying, uhm, shall we say less than truthfully, was the capper.

By the way, I've heard reference to Clinton firing the USA who was investigating Rose Law Firm before, but I've never read anything about that. Anyone have a link to an article?

Find us an organized effort to politisize Federal offices on the part of a Dem such as the one by Rove or Gonzo's actions.

No, huh?

Posted by Corky

Bill Clinton firing every US Attorney when he took office and putting in people who share his beliefs and ideology?

It IS unusual for a group to be fired during the administration and that is what set up the initial red flags. Then the fact that the Justice Department at first offered up a lame reason (when they didn't have to offer any reason at all), then retracted it, further raised suspicions.

Finally, Gonzales and other JD officials testifying, uhm, shall we say less than truthfully, was the capper.

Unusual sure, but illegal or outside the realm of the presidents power? No. As you point out the problems came when they covered up and were at the very least dishonest before the congressional committee.

If there is a recess appointment he/she will still have to be approved by the Senate by the end of the next session.

If there is a recess appointment he/she will still have to be approved by the Senate by the end of the next session.

Posted by taxman

Wouldn't that be the end of Bush's Presidency too though?

Unusual sure, but illegalof ourside the realm of the presidents power?

Obviously not "the EXACT same thing" is it.

Corky almost thinks, "Find us an organized effort to politisize Federal offices on the part of a Dem such as the one by Rove or Gonzo's actions."

How about appointment of federal judges being denied by Democratics misuse of filibuster?

How about the effort to use congressional hearing information to alert political attack groups to the "news", and done during those federal hearings of appointments?

How about selling Whitehouse visits/stays for contributions?

How about pardons for those who had escaped federal prosecution?

How about misusing their office to give their husband inside information resulting in billions of dollars in contracts that Feinstein was involved in?

Are you actually this dim ... ?

That would make you a liar, Rob.

UPDATE: Commenters have suggested that Bush could bypass the confirmation process with a recess appointment, but Bush and Harry Reid have an agreement in place that there will be no recess appointments during Congress' adjournment:

There'll be no recess appointments this time around, Roll Call reports (sub. req.), meaning the White House won't be taking advantage of Congress' vacation to install any contested nominees. That's due to a deal between Bush and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV). . . .

Last recess, the White House made a number of controversial recess appointments, including Swift Boat backer Sam Fox as ambassador to Belgium. In order to prevent that sort of thing from happening again, Reid had plotted to keep the Senate in "pro forma" session during the recess -- whereby the Senate floor personnel show up every three days to make it an official session. But now Reid and Bush have made a deal, according to Roll Call. Bush won't make any recess appointments and Reid has promised to move some of his nominees when Senate gets back in session.

Obviously, there is nothing truly binding about the agreement, and Bush could violate it. But in the Beltway world, that is a Draconian step that seems unlikely (though not impossible) for many reasons. Far more likely, it seems, is Bush's (reasonable) belief that Senate Democrats will be as accommodating as usual and confirm a replacement who is acceptable to the administration.

www.salon.com

Good ol' Harry!

Rob, you are being obtuse. I expect, however, that that is your middle name.

I don't think it was devious, it was the obvious move --canning Gonzo during the recess was politically the "path of least resistance" - Bowa

Just wait a few minutes for Gonzales to say that he was not "canned", and later this morning Bush will say he was not "canned" either. But you are right, Bowa, of course he was "canned". He probably would have been out of their six months ago but for Bush wanting to see if he could stand the heat. Now if he sticks Chertoff in there, the Department of Homeland Security will have a perfect excuse to miss the next terrorist attack.

Was there ever, ever, a lamer lame duck administration than this one, simultaneously with the Iraq quagmire on its plate and the September Report imminent. Enjoy your vacation, George and Laura, won't you.

As you point out the problems came when they covered up and were at the very least dishonest before the congressional committee.

Once again, why do you think they tried to cover it up if they had done nothing wrong?

Are they THAT incompetent?

That would make you a liar, Rob.

Posted by YAV

What? How? Explain? Douche

Tadly almost responds..... lol!

Think organized admin policy giving meetings to Fed employees on how to best serve the interests of the GOP.

Or, firing US attys that don't politicize their prosecutions.

Once again, why do you think they tried to cover it up if they had done nothing wrong?

I said already why I think they did... lack of balls and they were stupid.

You have already agreed that it was not unprecedented, so what could they have done wrong? We are in agreement that the president has the power to fire attorneys.

Obviously not "the EXACT same thing" is it.

Posted by YAV

Gotcha, so for you Yav, the only thing that matters is the timing... the fact that the action and motives were the same makes no difference to you, what matter is the date on the calendar.

The work Hack has never so appropriately been applied to a poster as it is to you Yav...

Were I in the Democratic leadership I think I would be looking everywhere except towards the Justice Dept. or Congressional investigations of that department right now. This sounds to me like a big diversion, probably to do with Iraq. Get everyone looking at Gonzo, the Justice Dept. etc. while Malaki is replaced just a guess.

The work Hack

Don't know what the fuck that means, but the WORD hack, is what applies to Yav

lack of balls and they were stupid.

I think it takes more balls to lie, boldfaced, to congress than to just blow them off and give no reason.

I get a bad feeling about this. Something just isn't right.

Gotcha, so for you Yav, the only thing that matters is the timing.

Nope. Incomplete answer. Timing, who, and why.

BTW, I think the USA situation is the most minor of the scandals Gonzales was front and center.

www.youtube.com

Good Ole Wobbie the Poopshoot, never saw a corrupt Republican he couldn't defend.

I think it takes more balls to lie, boldfaced, to congress than to just blow them off and give no reason.

Posted by ness_gadol

Not when you have a president who will commute your jail time or pardon you all together.

Plus in their minds it beats coming out and saying we fired them because they weren't doing what we wanted them to do... which would have been better in the long run, and would have fallen in line with the reasoning why every president fires attorneys.

I hate this person and I hope he dies. It better be a painful death too, because that will give me more satisfaction.

DanniDrivel(TM)

Good Ole Wobbie the Poopshoot, never saw a corrupt Republican he couldn't defend.

Posted by briwo

Am I defending Gonzales? Really? That's interesting, I didn't read that in any of my posts.

Late 70s Rambo, I'm saying they had the power to do it, not that it was right, or will be right when the next president does it, just that they have the power to do it, and they were stupid for trying to cover it up.

"How about appointment of federal judges being denied by Democratics misuse of filibuster?"
Posted by tadowe

Misuse?!? Doesn't anybody on this site understand Robert's Rules of Order?

Are you actually this dim ... ?

Not when you have a president who will commute your jail time or pardon you all together.

You find nothing wrong with that?

Briwo,

I agree with you. Something doesn't smell too fresh in this situation.

That being said, I'm pretty sure that, whatever the outcome of whatever schemes being implemented here, we can agree thta Gonzales' ouster can only be a good thing.

I get a bad feeling about this. Something just isn't right.

Posted by briwo

Briwo used to say this all the time in his merchant marine tugboat back in '78 while patrolling the dangerous waters of the Chesapeke Bay in between pushing barges into the docks...

Thank you for your service.

No Ride, Gonzo didn't make the list.

Does seem odd that first Rove goes, now Gonzo, Gen. Pace is retiring, Rummy hasn't been gone that long either. I will admit though that since Rummy exited things have gone a little better in Iraq so maybe Dumbya is listening to Daddy. He was up there in Maine recently. I'll feel a lot better if he somehow gets Cheney to resign probably for health reasons. When is Rice going to need to spend more time with her family??? Oh yeah, she doesn't have one, well they'll think of some excuse.

This sounds to me like a big diversion, probably to do with Iraq.
Posted by danni

No, the diversion will involve planes and skyscapers. Heck, it worked before, right?

You find nothing wrong with that?

Posted by ness_gadol

Again, right, wrong... it is what it is... the President has the power to fire attorney's and has the power to pardon or commute the jail time of american citizens...

You said it would take more balls to lie... after seeing Libby's trial go down and then be commuted, I think it really doesn't take any balls to lie.

Corky misdirects, " ..."

You are a slavish supporter of the Left, Corky, because you just can't bring yourself to recognize that Democratics misuse their public offices; even more so than do Republicans!

The difference is that Democratics have the memory span of a Golden Delicious apple and can't remember even a single bad one in the Donkey's barrel of government! Many people consider this stupid, but ...

Jerry Studds was a hero to you all, even though he was a known pedophile who sodomized underage congressional pages ... did he lose his job?

NO! The Leftist/Democratics kept him in power and office; while they managed to run a Republican out of town on a rail for writing emails to a conressional page who was of age!

... So, it isn't stupidity -- it's lying through your teeth HYPOCRISY -- that's what it is ...

Rob,

I do not want you to ever claim anyone is denigrating the troops again, since you are currently denigrating someone who served this country honourably. Wouldn't want to have to call you on hypocracy, after all.

but Bush and Harry Reid have an agreement in place that there will be no recess appointments during Congress' adjournment:

Hmmm...maybe this was the agreement:

Bush won't make any recess appointments, and Reid will stop saying the "war is lost" and will fund the troops yet again when the monies run out.

Bout time this made a banner headline.

No, but I tend to restrict my comments to things that I actually know something about.

Posted by ness_gadol at 2007-08-27 10:08 AM | Reply

I know it's a liberal site, but you could wait weeks for a thread about taking it in the poop chute, deep throating mules, and chicken fucking.

Ness, you're good people, but I just felt obligated to take that opportunity.

No Ride, Gonzo didn't make the list.

Posted by danni at 2007-08-27 10:39 AM

Seems you've been backtracking on "your list" ever since I called you on your hateful, despicable, death hoping with pain behavior. Where is that pride of yours over your hateful death hoping ways that you were so vocal about before?

I do not want you to ever claim anyone is denigrating the troops again, since you are currently denigrating someone who served this country honourably. Wouldn't want to have to call you on hypocracy, after all.

Posted by RevDarko

Fuck him and his mother... He's tried to paint me as some pussy because I didn't serve pumping himself up as some Rambo-esque battle hardened warrior, when that little bitch has seen as much battle as Lindsey Lohan has.

Dan comes forth to say, "Misuse?!? Doesn't anybody on this site understand Robert's Rules of Order? Are you actually this dim ... ?"

Not nearly as much so as you, evidently, who think it is the right of the Senate to deny appointments of federal judges, and based on their politics ...

So, I suppose that if Hillary is elected president and she wants to appoint a federal judge, that it would be okay to deny her that constitutional right?

Is that what you are saying, Dan?

Fuck him and his mother... He's tried to paint me as some pussy because I didn't serve pumping himself up as some Rambo-esque battle hardened warrior, when that little bitch has seen as much battle as Lindsey Lohan has.

Did you serve?

Did he?

You know the answer to both questions. Remember, you were amoung those who were angry at people disparaging Bush's service during Vietnam, yet here you are doing the very same thing.

BTW, sometime ago on a Gonzo thread I stated something to the effect that.....he has to go...or it's time he goes.

Tad,

You are aware that the Republicans (incluiding Bill Frist) tried to fillibuster Clintons judicial appointments, right?

You know the answer to both questions. Remember, you were amoung those who were angry at people disparaging Bush's service during Vietnam, yet here you are doing the very same thing.

Posted by RevDarko

Bush never attacked me... Bush said he is proud of his service but never acted like John Matrix while calling out others who didn't serve.

"while they managed to run a Republican out of town on a rail for writing emails to a conressional page who was of age!"

What Tad conveniently forgets is the behaviour was required, by rule, to be reported to the Page Board. Instead, the Republicans subverted the rules and reported it to the head of the Republican re-election campaigns, who then told Foley to run again.

But pretend it was the Democrats all you want, especially that Dem on the Page Board who was purposely kept in the dark.

Briwo was a 5 jump chump.

Here's the actual deal between Bush and reid:

"Bush won't make any recess appointments and Reid has promised to move some of his nominees when Senate gets back in session."

In keeping with my "cynical" theme today -- I wonder if one of the nominees that Reid has promised to move is the new AG?

I'd still rather be watching him on a perp walk, but this will do as a start for my Monday. Hey Gonzo, don't let the door hit your ass on the way out!

"who think it is the right of the Senate to deny appointments of federal judges, and based on their politics ..."

It is.

"So, I suppose that if Hillary is elected president and she wants to appoint a federal judge, that it would be okay to deny her that constitutional right? Is that what you are saying, Dan?"

Absolutely. It's their Constitutional right, and if you'd ever actually read it, you'd know it's their Constitutional duty.

Yes today is a day we get to poop on Robs head and kick him in the nuts and laugh about this fvcking idiot who even still has to argue about NOTHING.

ITS OVER Rob, Get a life and figure out how your going to sit around regurgitate faux news and defend Cheney from sending illegal email archives to congress right before they impeach his lame duck ass.

HAaaa Hhaaa Haaa Heee Heee Heeeee

I strongly urge President Bush to nominate a new attorney general who will respect our laws...
-Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass.

Teddy wants someone to repsect our laws?
"Pot? This is Kettle. You're black."

ITS OVER Rob, Get a life and figure out how your going to sit around regurgitate faux news and defend Cheney from sending illegal email archives to congress right before they impeach his lame duck ass.

I'm sorry... what?

Yes today is a day we get to poop on Robs head and kick him in the nuts and laugh about this fvcking idiot who even still has to argue about NOTHING.

You've got to love a guy that talks so tough, but then has to censor the work Fucking...

You're almost as tough as Briwo big guy...

Rev says, "You are aware that the Republicans (incluiding Bill Frist) tried to fillibuster Clintons judicial appointments, right?"

Is that why you are in favor of this? Because it is revenge or something?

I asked the question of Corky, but you can answer ...

Is that a misuse of congressional filibuster? Republicans tried to do it ... so Democratics actually do thwart the democratic process by misusing their offices accomplish that subversion.

How proud you all must feel in side-stepping the constitutional law ...

Bush never attacked me... Bush said he is proud of his service but never acted like John Matrix while calling out others who didn't serve.

Simple solution, Rob.

In response to someone who is baiting you about backing the war while not servig, say this:

I am not serving. It's not a job I think I am equiped to handle. I believe, however, our brave men and women in uniform deserve the support of everyone in the country, and in my opinion, that includes a support of the mission in which they are involved.

Simple, states your point, and you don't wind up looking like a hypocrit for denigrating a vet while browbeating others for your perception that they are denigrating our troops.

lol! I see Bowa doesn't like being wrong.

Tadly pleas guilty as charged; "even more so than do Republicans!"

Actually, Tad, I don't think it is a misuse of the fillibuster. I didn't think it was when the Republicans did it, or when the Democrats did.

I did find the Republicans' whining over it to be pathetic, really, but not all that surprising.

I just wanted to point out that you claimed it was a misuse when the Dems did it, without pointing out that the Repubs had done it as well.

"How proud you all must feel in side-stepping the constitutional law ..."

Almost as proud as you must be misunderstanding it.

Fillibusters are written into the Constitution. Wanna take a stab at why?

In response to someone who is baiting you about backing the war while not servig, say this:

That's along the lines I take most of the time, but when some douchebag like Briwo shows up trying to put down others for not serving while trumping up digging shit holes for real soldiers, then I'm going to chime in on that as well.

""No, the diversion will involve planes and skyscapers. Heck, it worked before, right?""

Or more likely....Iran.

Hell, I don't know but I just suspect there is something important coming and this is just intended to distract us from it.

He's tried to paint me as some pussy because I didn't serve

Nah, you're a pussy cause your wife does all the work while you dick around on here all day.

Another possible theory is that DAddy Bush told junior to jettison Rove and Gonzalez and try to get the people to look at his administration in a more favorable light. I think if nothing else they both brought a negative feeling from the public. This removal of Gonzo will help Bush's poll numbers. Depending on who gets nominated to succeed him it could help Dumbya's numbers significantly.

"Is that why you are in favor of this? Because it is revenge or something?"

No, because it is a perfectly legitimate (albeit aggravating to whichever party is in power)political strategy, used for generations in the United States Senate.

Your panties are tightly bunched and cutting off circulation to your brain. That, plus you have no clue whatever about the rule of the Senate and Constitutional law.

Hell, I don't know but I just suspect there is something important coming and this is just intended to distract us from it.

Posted by danni

If you fail to notice war with Iran because the Attorney General has resigned then chances are you have to wear a helmet whenever you go outside.

Posted by Rob_The_A_Hole at 2007-08-27 10:58 AM

Correction Rob...in view of the DanniDrivel(TM) posting history, her helmet is required to be worn by her at ALL times.

well this thing is going so fast that this is my third attempt at getting in..

RCADE>....prepare for a crash.....

well its too bad......

I thought that this was the time that republicans would show that they had balls between thier legs and not just flaps to keep the dirt out of the hole in thier dick.....

and instead we see more of the "pussification" of the republican male

too bad........

and as I am sure more than one of my right wing conspirators have said.......

rove, gonzales, and delay......shit and damn......

what will dems have to talk about.

HEY WAIT A MINUTE>..............when will the ACLU file a suit against the government for running him off..........or will LULAC come out today with a blisterin op-ed about this hispanic being railroaded out............I wont hold my breath..
hell I wont even hold my nose.......

That's along the lines I take most of the time, but when some douchebag like Briwo shows up trying to put down others for not serving while trumping up digging shit holes for real soldiers, then I'm going to chime in on that as well.

Interesting. Apparently, you and I switch places on the political spectrum here.

To me, I don't care if someone served as a plumber on military hospital ship stationed off Nova Scotia. I will NEVER denigrate their service. I may deingrate their mission or their corrupt leaders, but never someone who is serving in an a-political capacity.

I guess I'm a bit of a patriot in that respect.

Let's not forget, Gonzo is leaving with three lies still on the table:

The USAs were fired for competance reasons. Oh wait, no they weren't, they were fired for....

We don't know who compiled that list.

We don't know why that list was compiled.

Why isn't anyone trying to get to the bottom of these still-current lies?

lol! I see Bowa doesn't like being wrong.

You mwan over the recess appointment? tThat's no big deal -what are you gonna do, I wasn't aware of the deal that Reid and Bush had in place.

I wonder how long the "temporary replacement" can serve as AG before the president is required to nominate a permanent one.

Never would have crossed my mind Rev, if he hadn't tried playing me off as some pussy and he the spartan warrior...

If Bush were walking around in 2004 acting like a Congressional Medal of Honor recepient while calling Ted Kennedy a pussy I think people might have had a few words to say about that don't you think?

Gozales is just another member of this administration to pay for its inability to communicate... there was nothing wrong with firing those attorneys. If they had just come out and said, "We fired them because we wanted to," there would have been no contraversy, but they couldn't just do that... nope, they had to spin and lie and cover up... He should have stepped down a long time ago, just for being an idiot.

Posted by Rob_The_A_Hole at 2007-08-27 08:36 AM | Reply | Flag:

YEAH! GONE-zalez was a victim. I mean it wasn't like he had a 30-something person with NO TRIAL EXPERIENCE in charge of all the other attorneys. I mean, she must have been qualified, right? Afterall, she want to Televangelist Law School.

Gonzales is a joke and made a mockery out of the entire dept. Good riddance!

Why isn't anyone trying to get to the bottom of these still-current lies?

Posted by Danforth at 2007-08-27 11:00 AM

So you are going on record Danforth that getting to the bottom of lies by people in an administration is where our government should spend its time?

Why isn't anyone trying to get to the bottom of these still-current lies?

probably because the Congress has no jurisdiction whatsoever over political appointees that serve at the pleasure of the President and can be fired at will for any reason or no reason.

YEAH! GONE-zalez was a victim.

A) I didn't say that, I said he was stupid, and later on said he was ball-less.

B) If there you're going to copy the posting style of another drudgie, Redneckville is about the worst you could choose... second only to Dethspud.

If there you're going to copy the posting style of another drudgie, Redneckville is about the worst you could choose... second only to Dethspud.

Posted by Rob_The_A_Hole at 2007-08-27 11:06 AM

Dethspud is Bob Dole.

You can still gain votes by casting "neocons" into the status of "jews, gypsies, homosexuals, and other undesirables", and coming after them with verbal batons (in support of human sacrificing Islamic butchers to their bloodthirsty God ...

Go ahead! Call our president a dummy, or some other hateful epithet suited to the "liberal" philosophy of support for theocratic rule under Sharia and enforced by car bombs ...

How proud you Democratics must be in destroying your American enemies, eh? Alla ahkbar, and death to the infidel!

Posted by tadowe at 2007-08-27 08:44 AM | Reply | Flag:

Ta-Duh,

"casting "neocons" into the status of "jews, gypsies, homosexuals, and other undesirables",

Wasn't it the neocons who pushed for a constitutional amendment to ban gay people from getting married?

You should think before you type that dribble.

****** Go ahead! Call our president a dummy, or some other hateful epithet suited to the "liberal" philosophy of support for theocratic rule under Sharia and enforced by car bombs ...

How proud you Democratics must be in destroying your American enemies, eh? Alla ahkbar, and death to the infidel!

Posted by tadowe *******

........gee Tad, you sound bitter........

........just as a matter of curiosity, during the six years when the administration, congress and senate were controlled by Repubs.....can you name three outstanding changes that this group of lawmakers instituted in America that made our lives better ?.........

Dethspud is Bob Dole.

Posted by ride_on

Minus the personality

Senator Schumer said that "Democrats will not obstruct or impede a nominee who we are confident will put the rule of law above political considerations."

Political Doublespeak at its best

at the pleasure of the President

And the president serves at the pleasure of the American people. We want answers.

Well I'm glad to see Gonzales go. I'm not sure Chertoff will be any better, but from his resume he has more experience at the position, he was Assistant Attorney General once, so hopefully he won't be in over his head.

As for the attorney firing scandal, I think I have to agree that no felony was committed, but it seems time for a rule change. I don't think US Attorneys should be able to be fired any longer if they are in the middle of an investigation.
And to be fair, if Clinton fired a USA who was investigating the Rose Law Firm, that should not have been allowed either.
The law should be changed for all Presidents.
And really, is it a good idea for all USAs to be appointed by one party?

I don't think the quality of justice will improve just because Hillary fires all Bush's USAs and apoints a bunch of lockstep Dems. And if an investigation starts into one of Hillary's campaign donors, should Hillary be able to squash it by firing the attorney?

Just because it's been legal doesn't mean it should continue.

Plus, Bob Dole's arm probably works better.

"And the president serves at the pleasure of the American people. We want answers."

Posted by ness_gadol

So does Leahy, he just can't find anything. Maybe he should resign too.

I'm going on record to say I deserve good government, and I haven't been getting it from either party. I'm also saying it's too damn bad the Republicans in power for the last 6 years never understood about co-equal branches of government, or cared about the concept of checks and balances. And I'm also saying if the Executive Branch lies to me, repeatedly, another branch had better damn well step in and find out why.

My turn: why are you willing to accept three blatant lies from this administration and move on without demanding the truth?

Posted by Danforth at 2007-08-27 11:10 AM |

Sometime ago on a Gonzo thread I said this guy has to go. Politics was behind the changes in the attorneys. Should of just said so....

You never answered the question...You going on record that the government should spend its time inquiring about lies that people in an administration are involved in?

Actually, boys and girls, this is dangerous, bad news. As long as they were bobbing and weaving, they have not been able to accomplish their goals.
The Chertoff propaganda machine has been making "quiet" noise for the last 3 months.
Last time I checked, his ideas with regard to liberty, are, well, subversive and oppressive.

How real does it have to get?

"and can be fired at will for any reason"

Not true. That's bandied about a lot, but there are ways to fire which are illegal, such as firing someone for refusing to prosecute a Democrat just before a close election.

If you fail to notice war with Iran because the Attorney General has resigned then chances are you have to wear a helmet whenever you go outside.

Posted by Rob_The_A_Hole at 2007-08-27 10:58 AM |

Ok, that was funny

The advantage of putting cronies in position like this is that it doesn't really matter who has the office: They are just going to do whatever you want regardless of legal or ethical issues.

So what is the big deal about this? He's gone 15 months early and for those 15 months someone else will be following orders in the same manner.

None of the things Gonzalez did that people don't like were his ideas.

Plus, Bob Dole's arm probably works better.

Posted by ride_on

And Spud would be lucky to get a girl that looks like Elizabeth Dole... But then again he's Canadian so by their standards she's at least an 8.

the government should spend its time inquiring about lies that people in an administration are involved in?

As opposed to letting lies be told up and down and not demanding those that tell lies to be held accountable?

Are you serious?

"You never answered the question...You going on record that the government should spend its time inquiring about lies that people in an administration are involved in?"

Of course I answered it. My answer is YES, if one branch is lying to me, I expect the other branches to protect me.

It's you who hasn't answered: why are these three lies okay to you? Is it just because the liars have an (R) after their name?

Of course it is, but Presidents are allowed to fire their attorneys also, so where is the line drawn? Prosecutions must still be going on at the beginning of administrations... when Bush fired a crap ton of them back in 2001 there must have still been work going on. No one said a word then, so why is it a big deal now?

Posted by Rob_The_A_Hole at 2007-08-27 09:33 AM | Reply | Flag:

Why is it such a big deal now?

Because the firings were done to people who wouldn't bend under political pressure. They were done to the kind of people America needs in those positions. People who won't play politics with other peoples lives, but instead, have the best interest of America in mind, not one party.

Do you really believe they were fired for any other reason than that?

REMEMBER, Bush requires LOYALTY OATHS to be signed JUST TO LISTEN TO HIM SPEAK.

can you name three outstanding changes that this group of lawmakers instituted in America that made our lives better ?.........

Posted by skizziks at 2007-08-27 11:08 AM | Reply | Fl

well this is going so fast that my little antique wont keep up......

and lets look at this.......oh wait a minute.....the dems in the congress were screaming during this time that republicans didnt understand that the minority had rights and they had to be able to use thier three points of governing from the minority.

OBSTRUCT........OBSTRUCT......
....OBSTRUCT...

and of course now we read all the time that the minority has no right for anything.......lets see....what happened to change thier tune....oh yeah...november of 06........
well I guess that means that the polls are really hot on congress then.....WHAT>.........THAT LOW ARE THEY????????????????????

tell me it aint so , joe..........

and I for one hope that he just leave the office open and any problems it causes......well fuck it......its the dems fauilt and just say that.....

of course that would take some manhood which the republicans now show AGAIN......"THEY AINT"

Wisgod:
No more Rove or Gonzalez. Now, time for Cheney and Bush to resign.

Congress has plenty of jurisdiction over US Attys being told to prosecute cases on their political merit.

It is against the Law.

They were done to the kind of people America needs in those positions.

And in 2001, and in 1993 and all the times before we didn't need those attorneys?

Do you really believe they were fired for any other reason than that?

No... the president wanted to put people in those positions who would do what he wanted. Just like he did in 2001, and like his predecessor did in 1993.

It's you who hasn't answered: why are these three lies okay to you?

Posted by Danforth at 2007-08-27 11:16 AM

Lies aren't ok to me and I never said they were.

""If you fail to notice war with Iran because the Attorney General has resigned then chances are you have to wear a helmet whenever you go outside.""

When they actually get to the point of bombing but during the escalation of threats, excuses, etc. a distraction would be quite handy. The one thing Cheney/Bush don't want is a requirement that the administration to come back to Congress for authorization. Pelosi conveniently left that language out of the funding bill so I think that as they ratchet up the rhetoric they want us to be looking at Gonzo, etc.

Pelosi conveniently left that language out of the funding bill so I think that as they ratchet up the rhetoric they want us to be looking at Gonzo, etc.

Again, if you don't notice war with Iran because an embattled DOJ resigns, then I'm guessing your massive head and Pete Rose hair cut has ruined many a family photo...

"the dems in the congress were screaming during this time that republicans didnt understand that the minority had rights and they had to be able to use thier three points of governing from the minority. OBSTRUCT........OBSTRUCT......
....OBSTRUCT..."

BL2,

Let's flash forward to February 2009. President Hillary Clinton is settling down with a Democratic House, and a 59-41 Democratic Senate. What phrase, of your above post, will be the Republican's mantra?

"Lies aren't ok to me and I never said they were."

Then why aren't you at the front of the line demanding the truth from your own party?

....DanniDrivel(TM) continues the head banging on the wall...maintain your helmet on the head...and more than the mullet.

Yet another personfication of the mediocrity so perfectly reflective of an utterly mediocre presidency gets tossed off the shit wagon. Good riddance, Beto.

It's you who hasn't answered: why are these three lies okay to you?

Posted by Danforth at 2007-08-27 11:16 AM

Lies aren't ok to me and I never said they were.

Posted by ride_on

Its the lies that are the only bad part of this story... the only part that made this a scandal.

If they were honest from the start then this wouldn't have been a story.

Hell if they had just told a better lie it wouldn't have been a problem. They told a lie that was so easily refuted you have to wonder if the person who thought it up was a DNC plant. Don't say they were fired cuz they sucked, when there are performance evals saying they were doing a great job! That's retarded... say that it had always been the intention to finish the job from 2001 and fire the rest of the attorneys... at least that would be difficult to show as a lie.

Then why aren't you at the front of the line demanding the truth from your own party?

Posted by Danforth at 2007-08-27 11:25 AM

What is my party?

What is my party?

Posted by ride_on

Green

What is my party?

I'm not sure, but when you find it, apparently, you can cry if you want to.

Yes, let's fire them for purely political reasons, not anything to do with job performance. Don't insulate them from political pressure for doing a fair even handed job. Let's politicize our justice system even more, them America wins!

Not!

Whats funny to me is the same people who were so upset about Clinton lying about a sex act have no problem when their guy lies, for whatever reason. Those people are part of the problem in the country.

"What is my party?"

Oh, hell, you tell me.

Okay, change party to government. Will you answer the damn question now?

I'm not sure, but when you find it, apparently, you can cry if you want to.

Posted by RevDarko

Keep an eye on that slut, Judy... she's trying to get with Johnny.

You would cry too if it happened to you.

Keep an eye on that slut, Judy... she's trying to get with Johnny.

Cool. I was afraid I was being too obscure on that one.

"Hell if they had just told a better lie it wouldn't have been a problem."

And therein lies the cancer at the heart of the current Republican party. Party loyalists who just want to be lied to better.

psst....Judy's wearin' his ring!

Party loyalists who just want to be lied to better.

Lied to better what?

"Lied to better what?"

Not America as a whole, that's for damn sure.

Will you answer the damn question now?

Posted by Danforth at 2007-08-27 11:29 AM

Already did.

The real reason Gonzales is quitting:

news.yahoo.com

I'm disappointed. I had hoped he would stick around just to keep the idiots in the congress busy trying to have him executed or something. As it is now, they may find time to mess up something that's REALLY important. Oh, well, just so long as they don't get amnesty passed we'll be all right for a while. It is fun watching all their little antics though.

Barack Obama today released the following statement on the resignation of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.

"I have long believed that Alberto Gonzales subverted justice to promote a political agenda, and so I am pleased that he has finally resigned today. The President needs to nominate an Attorney General who will be the people's lawyer, not the President's lawyer, and in an Obama Administration that person will first and foremost defend and promote the rights and liberties enshrined in our Constitution," said Obama.

Let's flash forward to February 2009. President Hillary Clinton is settling down with a Democratic House, and a 59-41 Democratic Senate. What phrase, of your above post, will be the Republican's mantra?

Posted by Danforth at 2007-08-27 11:23 AM | Reply |

I learned a long time ago at the golf course that you should always be the last one to lie about the score and when you bullshit, dont make it so far out there that its not believable......maybe you should take heed of these lessons I have learned before you..........ha ha......

and there will be TWO republican senators from texas so it might be 58-2.....thank you very much..
and if you are right, there will be more because that kind of liberal senate will give two to DC even though they arent a state and hell for that matter.....mexico might have a senator or two...........

and oh yeah.....all those dems would be doing pretty much whatever they wanted since all of the sanctamonious liberals from this site would disappear....IF that happened as you said.......but it was a nice try at humor

gotta go...hasta laredo

We should not tolerate officials who lie, mislead, or misrepresent.

Posted by ness_gadol

I didn't here a lib say that about Clinton. He did all of the above.

"Alberto Gonzales was never the right man for this job. He lacked independence, he lacked judgment, and he lacked the spine to say no to Karl Rove. This resignation is not the end of the story. Congress must get to the bottom of this mess and follow the facts where they lead, into the White House." -- Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev.

"It is a sad day when the attorney general of the United States resigns amid a cloud of suspicion that the system of justice has been manipulated for political purposes. More than accountability, we need answers. ....If the power of the prosecutor has been misused in the name of partisanship, we deserve a full airing of the facts." -- Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich., House Judiciary chairman.

"Long overdue. The president must nominate an attorney general who is a lawyer for the American people, not a political arm of the White House." -- New Mexico governor and Democratic presidential candidate Bill Richardson.

"It's about time ... Gonzales now joins a long list of Republican officials resigning under a cloud of scandal, but these resignations cannot purge the Bush administration of its problems. The true problem rests with the Bush White House itself, which continues to put what's best for the Republican Party ahead of what's best for America." -- Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean.

The real reason Gonzales is quitting:

news.yahoo.com

Posted by taxman at 2007-08-27 11:35 AM | Reply

Classic.

Now the hacienda's dark, the town is sleeping,
Now the time has come to part,
The time for little Jorge's weeping!

Vaya Con Dios, my darling Alberto,
May God be with you my love . . .

Now, the village mission bells are softly ringing,
If you listen with your heart
you'll hear them singing
Vaya Con Dios, my darling Alberto,
May God be with you my love . . .

Where ever you may be,
Little Jorge'll be beside you
Although you're many million miles away!
Each night I'll say a prayer,
a prayer to guide you
To hasten every lonely hour of every lonely day . . .

Now, the dawn is breaking through a gray tomorrow,
But the memories we share
are there to borrow
Vaya Con Dios, my darling Alberto,
May God be with you my love . . .

Vaya Con Dios, my darling Alberto,
May God be with you my love . . .

"Already did."

Um...no, you didn't. If lies aren't okay with you, as you've stated, why aren't you first in line demanding the truth from your own government?

Ness alluded to it earlier: which is it, investigations to get to the bottom of lies the government is telling us, or unfettered, unchecked lies by those in power, allowed to go unpunished and uninvestigated?

YES! Better late than never! It is a great day for America...

Things are never as they appear in Bush's Bizarro World...but it is good to see Gonzales finally go.

Now perhaps we can concentrate on getting rid of Cheney?

You would cry too if it happened to you.

Posted by LeeAtwater at 2007-08-27 11:30

damned good one........and now we have an age check to see if some of these young mtv whippersnappers know what the hell you are talking about,or they will just sit there with their hat on backwards and pants down to the knees.....

signed...

leslie

""Oh, well, just so long as they don't get amnesty passed we'll be all right for a while.""

Oh, you mean the president's immigration bill.

"leslie"

BL2,

I thought you weren't a supporter of Gore.

and now we have an age check to see if some of these young mtv whippersnappers know what the hell you are talking about

That song is a classic. How could anyone not know it?

Oh, you mean the president's immigration bill.

Uh huh.

We all know that 0 Democrats supported the bill and in fact, actively worked to kill the bill, Harry Reid in particular.

"We should not tolerate officials who lie, mislead, or misrepresent.

Posted by ness_gadol

I didn't here a lib say that about Clinton. He did all of the above.

Posted by sniper"

So far as I know the DR wasn't around during the Lewinsky affair.

But plenty of us have since said that about Clinton's behavior. But of course that little fact wouldn't suit your purpose at all, now would it?

"Gonzales Resigns"

Another victory for the America hating, tax-spend endorsing, bussing imposing, goverment school supporting, Christian persecuting, gun controling, Islamofacist loving, lillylivered limpwristed libs. Oh, dead God, why do they so hate Our Country that they consistently endorse programs and policies put forth by the Bin Laden crowd?

God Bless Our Esteemed and Revered President, George W. Bush!
God Bless the Late Political Player, Albertoo Gonzoolez!
God Bless Our Savior, Rudy!

"I thought you weren't a supporter of Gore."

Posted by Danforth

He's a 60's bra strap.

www.1966batfan.com

JeffJ,

You have to admit, were it passed, it'd be President Bush's Immigration Bill. Harry Reid would barely be a blip on history's radar.

101, I couldn't resist. I imagined Gonzales all cracked out with his shirt off and his man-titties flopping around - still a little turned on.

Mr. Gonzales was not up to the job on many levels--the Sandy Burglar case, the testimony in the Congress was atrocious.

And the attorneys being fired was handled so poorly he should be gone.

Chertoff is not any better--Ted Olson would be great!

Murphy

which is it, investigations to get to the bottom of lies the government is telling us, or unfettered, unchecked lies by those in power, allowed to go unpunished and uninvestigated?

Of course alleged lies should be investigated and those lying be held accountable.

That said, you have to recognize that this isn't just about getting to the truth - it's also political grandstanding and partisan sniping.

That's along the lines I take most of the time, but when some douchebag like Briwo shows up trying to put down others for not serving while trumping up digging shit holes for real soldiers, then I'm going to chime in on that as well.

Posted by Rob_The_A_Hole at 2007-08-27 10:56 AM

You know everytime you call me aliar or question my service you only prove what a real and totaly piece of shit you are.

You're too gutless to do it yourself and then you put down others who do what you are afraid of.

Make you feel better about yourself Wobbie?

"Good-bye to my Alberto, good-bye Rovalita
Adios mis amigos, Gonzo y Karlita
You won't have a name when you ride the big air-plane
And all they will call you will be deportees."

"I'm sure you were beside yourself when Clinton fired all of them, including the Attorney that launched the Rose Law Firm investigation, right?"

I was in 4th grade.

Posted by ness_gadol

Good 1 Ness !

Notwithstanding one individual, the pros and cons are pretty reasonable here today.

Is it too much to ask to have a transparent government free from this kind of bullshit?
Posted by ness_gadol

I wonder if there has ever been an administration that tried, day after day, to govern the country in a lawful, intelligent way ?

Carter is reviled by the right, but how much hanky-panky was involved in his admin ?
(maybe lots, I dunno).

"leslie"

BL2,

I thought you weren't a supporter of Gore.

Posted by Danforth at 2007-08-27 11:44

just had to comment............

now there are some here who are really confused.....of course this site does have some REALLY OLD PEOPLE...(lisa, danni)

and ness.....there are young people today who look at you with small eyes when you talk about the beach boys, much less someone older...

and out........and oh thanks a hell of a lot..
will be humming......its my party and ILl cry if I want to
cry if I want to......cry if I want toooooooooo

you would cry too if it happened to you.uh..uh..........

ALL DAY LONG........

of course this site does have some REALLY OLD PEOPLE...(lisa, danni)

And even older....BLT.

Ted Olson would be great!

Murphy

Posted by MURPHY at 2007-08-27 11:51 AM

The man who lied about his wife calling him on 911? Why not just get Charlie Manson out of jail for the job. Manson couldn't be any worse than Gonzales or Ted Bundy Olson.

You're too gutless to do it yourself and then you put down others who do what you are afraid of.

Posted by briwo

See Rev... here we go again...

Briwo, I'm not "too afraid" to mop a floor, or paint the barracks where the soldiers stay, or whatever else you during war torn 1978...

Rudy Giuliani would be a great AG. Unfortunately, he wasting time running for president.

America Tortures

Posted by truthhurts

So do your posts...

BB--you really believe that Ted Olson LIED about his wife calling from the plane that hit the Penatagon? Did you see the man on TV talk about that phone call?

Did you know there were others who called from that plane?

Are you serious?

Man--you need some help--you are sick!

Murphy

America Tortures

Posted by truthhurts

So do your posts...

Posted by Rob_The_A_Hole

truth hurts donut.

truth hurts donut.

Posted by truthhurts

No, just your dreck...

truth hurts donut.

Posted by truthhurts

No, just your dreck...

Posted by Rob_The_A_Hole

for a second i thought you developed a conscience, go back to your regularly scheduled lies.

for a second i thought you developed a conscience

Nope... go fuck yourself.

there's the rob I love, you werking from home or from werk?

Bye Bye 'Berto

WANTED: Total toady. Not a cut-and-runner. Must love torture. Contempt for Constitution a plus. Amnesia essential. Benefits include media boredom the day your mission is accomplished, plus a tenured position at the George W. Bush Library and Institute.

UPDATE II: In his brief public appearance, Gonzales says only that he is "concluding" his public service.

No "citing personal reasons."

No questions from the press.

Like Cornyn, he plays the Hispanic card: "My worst day on the job was better than my father's best day."

I wonder if his fath-- WAIT! Look over here! It's Michael Vick!

excerpts

more

www.huffingtonpost.com

BB--you really believe that Ted Olson LIED about his wife calling from the plane that hit the Penatagon? Did you see the man on TV talk about that phone call?

Please don't get him started, Murph.

Here is what BBob believes about 9-11:

1. The Pentagon was hit by a missile, not a plane.

2. The towers were actually broght down by controlled demolitions.

3. The second plane actually launched a missile just prior to impacting with the Trade Center.

4. None of the phone calls that came from the plane crashing in Pennsylvania actually took place - they were all lies.

there's the rob I love, you werking from home or from werk?

Posted by truthhurts

Neither... Watching a friends kids, so I'm plugged in from their place.

No "citing personal reasons."

No questions from the press.

He should have pulled a Sammy Sosa and come out with a translator...

America Tortures

Posted by truthhurts

Always has, always will - just as every other nation in the world.

Always has, always will - just as every other nation in the world.

Posted by JeffJ

Except those pussy French... like Furio...

Canada's method of torture is a little different... they inject their prisoners with Syphillis and then tell them they can confess or just go get it treated in their health care system... after over 6 months of waiting to see the doctor to get a shot of penicilin they always come back to the gov't and confess everything.

Gonzales Resigns, Vows to Find the Real Perjurers!

A grim-faced Alberto Gonzales announced today that he was resigning in order to dedicate the rest of his life to "finding the real perjurers." "They deceived Congress and the American people," he said, "and I won't rest until they're brought to justice." He added that he also intends to find out who used the chief law enforcement office in the land to subvert the Constitution.

The outgoing Attorney General also noted that someone in a senior Administration authorized the use of torture, which he observed was not only "barbaric" but also violated international law. "That discovery caused me great pain," Mr. Gonzales said. "I mean, it wasn't the kind of pain that simulates organ failure or death, but it still kinda smarted."

Mr. Gonzales scoffed at rumors that he's writing a book called If I Did It. "Believe me," the Attorney General said. "If anybody was writing something like that, I'd have gotten a report from Gen. Hayden about it."

www.huffingtonpost.com

Always has, always will - just as every other nation in the world.

Posted by JeffJ

The vatican tortures?

Interesting

where in US law is this encoded, interested to read it

The vatican tortures?

Who is going to be first to come back with the Captain Obvious joke on this one?

Wait

Gonzo has to do some Hertz commercials first.

TH,

It isn't coded into law, just like 'Code Red' can't be found in any army manual. Nevertheless, it happens.

It always has and it always will.

Zat,

Did you notice what kind of shoes he was wearing?

Italian, eh?

TH,

It isn't coded into law, just like 'Code Red' can't be found in any army manual. Nevertheless, it happens.

It always has and it always will.

Posted by JeffJ

and until bertie and bushie got together, anyone caught perpetrating such acts would be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, now they get an attaboy and a medal of freedom.

anyone caught perpetrating such acts would be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law

Really? So no one ever stepped over a line with a prisoner during interrogations and wasn't punished?

You must have contacts all throughout the CIA, FBI and Military Inteligence to know something like that... that's amazing, we should all start listening to you more often since you are so powerful, important and in the know.

I strongly urge ted kennedy to get off his treasonous , traitorous fat ass and resign from American politics , at least be a man and have a thread of honor .

john edwards is a hack ambulance chaser , may all the plaques of humanity fall upon him for his lying . And leahy too .

no but before it was illegal now it is not.

It's pretty sad when someone's "American Dream" is our nightmare.

Where is Bush going to find someone as incompetent? Well...I guess we know by now that Bush seems to have an endless supply.

no but before it was illegal now it is not.

Posted by truthhurts

How many cases of torture were tried in America against CIA, FBI, NSA, etc agents in the 40s, 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s, 90s?

and until bertie and bushie got together, anyone caught perpetrating such acts would be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, now they get an attaboy and a medal of freedom.

Please reconcile your statement against the fact that the Abu Graihb investigations resulted in convictions for those found doing the very thing you claim is NOW legal.

""I strongly urge ted kennedy to get off his treasonous , traitorous fat ass and resign from American politics , at least be a man and have a thread of honor .""

I'm sure Ted is truely bothered by what you think.

Where are the "plaques of humanity" hung anyway???

they were found guilty because bush their CiC stated, before the investigation was complete that the soldiers were guilty.

Arriba, arriba!!! Andale, andale!!!

Please reconcile your statement against the fact that the Abu Graihb investigations resulted in convictions for those found doing the very thing you claim is NOW legal.

Posted by JeffJ

If torture is legal I've got a nice hot halogen lamp sitting on my desk I'd like to introduce to the back of my boss's ballbag...

no but before it was illegal now it is not.

You're wrong.

If pictures surfaced today of a soldier using thumb-screws on a detainee said soldier would be prosecuted.

The vatican tortures?

Interesting

Posted by truthhurts at 2007-08-27 12:32 PM | Reply

Yes, I think so.

Have you ever had the experience of sitting through a 75 minute "folk Mass" with music provided by acoustic guitar-toting, Birkenstock-clad nuns with a penchant for songs such as "Blowing in the Wind," "If I had a Hammer" and "Morning has Broken?"

If not, you don't know torture.

Arriba, arriba!!! Andale, andale!!!

Posted by grumpy_too

I wonder what your response was when Colin Powell stepped down?

they were found guilty because bush their CiC stated, before the investigation was complete that the soldiers were guilty.

No shit.

The pictures pretty much sealed that deal.

The larger question remains:

Guilty of what?

How can they be guilty if torture is legal, as you posit?

How can they be guilty if torture is legal, as you posit?

Posted by JeffJ

Shouldn't they have gotten an "'atta boy and a medal of freedom" as you said Truth?

I wonder what your response was when Colin Powell stepped down?

Let's celebrate!

Pass me some fried chicken and some watermelon!

- Grumpytoo

I was gonna head down the road of some grape soda and a 9 mil Jeff, but that will work too... LOL

they were found guilty of actions that alberto said were acceptable forms of treatment to detainees, because bush found it politically necessary to through our soldiers under the bus for doing stuff that was sanctioned and directed by administration folk.

If Bush was not facing the publicity of those pictures those troops would never have seen a trial, cause it was national policy.

they were scapegoats.

If AMerica followed the current law those soldiers would have not committed any crime.

AMerica can now LEGALLY perform any act on a detainee short of death of permament loss of a limb.

congrats.

AMerica Tortures.

AMerica can now LEGALLY perform any act on a detainee short of death of permament loss of a limb.

congrats.

Is this like your interpreation of Habeas Corpus being gone too?

Whatever happened with that by the way?

On 29 September 2006, the House and Senate approved the Military Commissions Act of 2006 (MCA), a bill that would suspend habeas corpus for any alien determined to be an "unlawful enemy combatant" engaged in hostilities or having supported hostilities against the United States"[4][5] by a vote of 6534. (This was the result on the bill to approve the military trials for detainees; an amendment to remove the suspension of habeas corpus failed 4851.[6]) President Bush signed the Military Commissions Act of 2006 into law on October 17, 2006.

With the MCA's passage, the law altered the language from "alien detained ... at Guantnamo Bay":

"Except as provided in section 1005 of the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005, no court, justice, or judge shall have jurisdiction to hear or consider an application for a writ of habeas corpus filed by or on behalf of an alien detained by the United States who has been determined by the United States to have been properly detained as an enemy combatant or is awaiting such determination." 1005(e)(1), 119 Stat. 2742.

this bill redefines unlawful enemy combatant in such a broad way that it refers to any person who is

engaged in hostilities or who has purposefully and materially supported hostilities against the United States.

it is numbnuts

Posted by truthhurts

So wierd cuz this dude I work with just got a letter for Jury Duty... maybe its a prank...

engaged in hostilities or who has purposefully and materially supported hostilities against the United States.

Posted by truthhurts

OOOOOOOOOHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!
!! So it has dick to do with John Q. Public... okay... cool.

en.wikipedia.org(prisoner)

bushie suspends HC

of gwb sees me as an enemy combatant, yes.

We The People...

let me explain something to you.

The US Govt is established to serve me, not hte other way around.

Bush etal, need to demonstrate the possibility of criminality or establish a reasonable suspicion of my criminality. This is a cornerstone of our government. This is why we broke with England.

Read teh Bill of Rights.

This is no longer an absolute and that is a tragedy.

Nice spin, TH.

You STILL fail to address how they were found guilty of committing an act that Bush legalized.

everthing short of killing and permanent disability is now legal, most of the infractions at AG do not fit that illegality.

You STILL fail to address how they were found guilty of committing an act that Bush legalized.

Posted by JeffJ

Or how they got a trial at all if there is no Habeas Corpus...

Who is going to be first to come back with the Captain Obvious joke on this one?

Not to nitpick, but seeing as it's a comment about the Vatican, shouldn't it be a Cardinal Obvious joke?

"Gozales is just another member of this administration to pay for its inability to communicate...

Posted by Rob_The_A_Hole at 2007-08-27 08:36 AM"

If "inability to communicate" means "tells bald-faced lies to Americans and to Congress, including while under oath," then I agree with Rob.

Once again, Rob argues that the Bush Administration hid from subpoenas, spun the issue and may have even lied...all to cover up...nothing at all.

What happened to "if you haven't done anything wrong, you have nothing to worry about," Rob?

And adios to the cartoon mouse, I've never seen a lawyer stupid enough to send incriminating information via e-mail.

everthing short of killing and permanent disability is now legal,

You're wrong.

who said there is no HC,

oh yeah, that is your lie.

HC is no longer an absolute, it is now at the whim of bush, ie if he decides you are an illegal combatant.

it was not a presidential authority, now it is his to decide upon.

America tortures, and it makes me smile. I love the fact that right now somebody darker than an Italian is getting waterboarded for no other reason than he or she is a muslim. I hope they're kid is forced to watch.

I've never seen a lawyer stupid enough to send incriminating information via e-mail.

He probably thought the email could disappear down the rabbit hole a la Rove.

Once again, Rob argues that the Bush Administration hid from subpoenas, spun the issue and may have even lied...all to cover up...nothing at all.

What they were covering up was what they thought would be a political issue of firing these attorneys. So instead of just telling the truth they tried to make up a story that they were fired for poor performance. That's not the truth, they were fired because they weren't pursuing the presidents agenda.

I guess we have to start all over like with Ness, except Joe, I'll do the speedie version:

Have presidents fired attorneys for no reason before? Yes.

Did they get in trouble for it? No.

Is the president allowed to fire attorneys? Yes.

Were you upset about the fired attorneys in 2001? I'm gonna guess no, but correct me if I'm wrong.

Were you upset about the fired attorneys in 1993? I'm gonna guess no, but correct me if I'm wrong.

101 - you like it when the kiddies watch, eh?

How proud you Democratics must be in destroying your American enemies, eh? Alla ahkbar, and death to the infidel!

Posted by tadowe

What a freak.

who said there is no HC

Some flaming pacifist douchebag...

bushie suspends HC

Posted by truthhurts

Now perhaps we can concentrate on getting rid of Cheney?

Posted by donnerboy

Oh no ! Then we'd have Bush wondering around for another 16 months impersonating Randle McMurphy in the closing scenes of One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest !

Actually I am correct.

Criminal and Civil Prosecutions
Two provisions of the MCA have been criticized for allegedly making it harder to prosecute and convict officers and employees of the U.S. government for misconduct in office.

Under the War Crimes Act of 1996, any violation of Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions was considered a war crime and could be criminally prosecuted. Section 6 of the Military Commissions Act limited the definition of what constitutes a war crime under the War Crimes Act so that only actions that are considered "grave breaches" of Common Article 3 could be the basis for a prosecution, and it made that definition retroactive to November 26, 1997. The specific actions defined in section 6 of the Military Commissions Act include torture, cruel or inhumane treatment, murder, mutilation or maiming, intentional causing serious bodily harm, rape, sexual assault or abuse, and the taking of hostages. According to Mariner, of Human Rights Watch, the effect is "that perpetrators of several categories of what were war crimes at the time they were committed, can no longer be punished under U.S. law."[33] The Center for Constitutional Rights adds:

"GRAVE BREACHES"- torture, cruel or inhumane treatment, murder, mutilation or maiming, intentional causing serious bodily harm, rape, sexual assault or abuse, and the taking of hostages.

war crimes at the time they were committed, can no longer be punished under U.S. law."[

what's that it allows that torture can be prosecuted? yes, but what is torture? Waterboarding is now legal, as are stress positions and dogs and sleep deprivation and extreme temperatures, well if it smells like torture, walks like torture and hurts like torture, it is torture.

HC is no longer an absolute, it is now at the whim of bush, ie if he decides you are an illegal combatant

How many ICs have we had? The one that always comes to mind is Jose Padilla...

Odd that he was just convicted in a trial... considering he was an IC and got a trial even though there is no Habeas for combatants... really odd.

heh heh

Greeted as Liberators
mission accomplished
no WMDs
dead or alive... mostly alive
Katrina
Dubai
Harriet Myers
Sees Vlads heart
You doing a fine job Brownie

I could do this all day. Watching this prezidunce wrap up his legacy is priceluss.

101 - you like it when the kiddies watch, eh?

Posted by mOntecOre at 2007-08-27 01:23 PM | Reply

I don't let the kids watch. Hell, I can barely let the dog watch.

Waterboarding is now legal, as are stress positions and dogs and sleep deprivation and extreme temperatures

Oh no not sleep deprivation and rooms under 73 degrees!!! Oh those poor terrorists!

Yeah that's torture alright...

dog watch in a mirror when you are fucking the bitch doggy style?

101 - lol. It's good to keep the dog away - especially if s/he's fat. A fat dog farting during sex kills the moment. If you don't believe me, ask Rob about his gaseous high school girlfriend.

I guess we have to start all over like with Ness

What the fuck ever. You're too dense to consider that the irregularity of these firings and the subsequent cover-up could be an indicator of some wrongdoing.

The Vatican tortures?

Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!

___AMerica Tortures.___

Everyone tortures: china, uzbekistan, syria, sierra leone, sudan, iran, yemen, etc.

Nice crowd. Mommy would be so proud. At least those other countries have got the excuse of having psychos as heads of state. All the u.s. has is a clumsy retard and his angry and bitter die-hards, and their whole fucking world is crashing around their ears. Sorry sight, really...sorry sight.

Speaking of dogs, I had a roomate in college whose dog "Nixon" would eat the crotch out of his girlfriend's panties while they slept. Jealousy can be so ugly sometimes.

Oh no not sleep deprivation

Sleep dep. can kill you.

Shawqi Ahmad Omar
Cyrus Kar
Mohammad Munaf

Rob - in your opinion, can a President fire a prosecutor for any reason, or no reason at all?

If you don't believe me, ask Rob about his gaseous high school girlfriend.

Posted by mOntecOre

She was always good for a rodeo...

For those like Ness who have never seen a beaver in real life, the Rodeo is when you bring a fat ugly bitch home to fuck her, but unknown to her you've got 5 friends waiting in the closet or another room... a few seconds/minutes (depending on how fat/ugly) your friends bust in and you see how long you can stay on the bitch before she bucks you off...

Rob - in your opinion, can a President fire a prosecutor for any reason, or no reason at all?

Posted by mOntecOr

Since pretty much every president in recent memory has fired attorneys for no reason except that they felt like it and they wanted to hand pick them, it would seem the answer to your question is yes a President can fire them for any reason or no reason.

Close Rob. They covered it up because it WAS a political issue. They conspired to commit electioneering.

But it was legal electioneering, since they had the loophole of "Serves at the pleasure of the President". This let them fire USAs so that they could get the right sort of crony who would blindly follow orders.

And then they got caught, and it was going to be obvious that they were electioneering, and although legal, it wouldn't look very good. So they lied, poorly, to cover it up. As you say, they didn't have the balls to admit they were electioneering, just as Clinton didn't have the balls to cop to Monica.

Yes, they were fired for not upholding the President's agenda. Except that Bush's agenda wasn't upholding the Constitution, it was electioneering a free Democratic election, albeit legally.

So they lied about it. And personally I think Bush should be impeached for that lie, just as Clinton was rightly impeached for lying about a legal act.

For those like Ness who have never seen a beaver in real life

Ouch, that burns.

Tell us again how you got your jollies off back in college by having men's genitalia rubbed against your face.

"it would seem the answer to your question is yes a President can fire them for any reason or no reason.

Posted by Rob_The_A_Hole at 2007-08-27 01:37 PM"

See, that's the issue here - there are impermissible reasons to fire a prosecutor. The Dems seem to feel that at least some of these firings were for impermissible reasons. Seems to be that they should be able to investigate to find out whether they are right.

Sleep dep. can kill you.

Posted by ness_gadol

So can chicken wings... guess we better stop feeding them.

Speaking of dogs, I had a roomate in college whose dog "Nixon" would eat the crotch out of his girlfriend's panties while they slept. Jealousy can be so ugly sometimes

Monte,

If Nixon was a large black dog with a head weighing about 90 pounds, I'm pretty sure you and I have met in the past.

Otherwise, dogs named Nixon apparently share some strange personality traits.

Norm - I thought that it was illegal to fire a prosecutor for, say, refusing to bring a false indictment against a person running for office. Am I wrong?

See, that's the issue here - there are impermissible reasons to fire a prosecutor.

Then how could both Bush and Clinton and all the other presidents before them get away with it? Was it just the congress at the time didn't care and it was just a courtesy granted to incoming presidents?

Bush fired like half of them in 2001, Clinton fired all of them in 93... you're telling me every single one of those firings was on the level?

the Rodeo is when you bring a fat ugly bitch home to fuck her

I've never had that...ahem..."pleasure."

I prefer women who I'm happy to wake up next to the next morning. But, to each his own, Rob_the_Fug_Fucker.

They were done to the kind of people America needs in those positions.

And in 2001, and in 1993 and all the times before we didn't need those attorneys?

Do you really believe they were fired for any other reason than that?

No... the president wanted to put people in those positions who would do what he wanted. Just like he did in 2001, and like his predecessor did in 1993.

Posted by Rob_The_A_Hole at 2007-08-27 11:19 AM | Reply | Flag:

WTF are you talking about? When did Clinton hire attorneys and then fire them because they wouldn't open a case against a political opponent? Can you name one? I can name at least 8 from Bushits administration.

Rev - Nixon was mostly German Shepard - probably closer to 75-80 lbs. He lived in NY and Colorado before moving with his owner to Oregon. Funny if you a knew a dog with the same moniker with a taste for panty crotch.

guess we have to start all over like with Ness

no matter how you spin it Wobbie Gonzales was a liar and obstructionist. He lied to Congress (for whatever reason) he supports Torture and secret prisons and illegal wiretapping. And he can't remember what he had for breakfast.

I Noticed how you always fail to mention that NORMALLY the Attorney's are removed and replaced at the beginning of the Presidents term. It is very unusual and suspicious to remove your OWN Attorneys in the middle of the Presidents term of office.

Fact is, we were right all along to call for his resignation. He could have been Impeached.

As Edwards so succinctly put it...Better late than never!

Now we can concentrate on removing the real root of all evil.

Darth Cheney!

"So can chicken wings... guess we better stop feeding them.

Posted by Rob_The_A_Hole at 2007-08-27 01:39 PM"

I guess you've made the mistake of ordering the "Nitro" wings too, huh?

So can chicken wings... guess we better stop feeding them.

Man, you're a real piece of work. Comparing feeding to sleep deprivation? And your wife is a doctor?

I don't know many docs that can put up with abject idiocy for very long. You're a lucky guy.

I feel sorry for her, though.

Tell us again how you got your jollies off back in college by having men's genitalia rubbed against your face.

Posted by ness_gadol

Again? I've never had a set of balls or a cock rubbed against my face...

Now comes the part where the Iranian med student tells us how he's pulling in poon by the crate... Put down your drinks everyone, you don't want to spray coffee all over your keyboards...

I guess you've made the mistake of ordering the "Nitro" wings too, huh?

Posted by mOntecOre

Oh so many times... I don't know if I love the spicy taste, or the diahrea... both are fun I guess.

Two provisions of the MCA have been criticized for allegedly making it harder to prosecute and convict officers and employees of the U.S. government for misconduct in office.

So, "allegedly making it harder to prosecute and convict" = "Making torture legal."???

what's that it allows that torture can be prosecuted? yes, but what is torture?

That's the million dollar question.

What is torture?

Where do you personally draw the line, TH?

Yes or no to the following:

Limiting sleep to 4 hours per day for a period of up to 10 days.

Keeping cell temperatures at either 89 degrees or 64 degrees.

Playing loud (but not eardrum shattering) music for 8 hours at a time.

Up to 5 open-handed slaps during a 2-hour interrogation session.

The use of drugs such as sodium pentathol to make the detainee more likely to give up info.

If a detainee was wounded before capture - using pain medication as a 'reward' for giving up information.

When did Clinton hire attorneys and then fire them because they wouldn't open a case against a political opponent?

Bingo.

Go ahead, call me names like the scum on this site do routinely...

Posted by tadowe

I think of them more as descriptive terms than as "name calling". Have you ever reread some of your own frothing rantings in a calmer moment?

Pretty freaky stuff. I'll think you'll find most would agree.

And, from the delicious irony department...

"As to the timing of the resignation, Senator Cornyn said "I think he was probably just worn down by the criticism. This sort of thing has a Chinese water torture effect of drip drip drip drip..."

(John Cornyn on Fox News)

Oregon is an "at-will" employment state. Generally, that means that employees can be fired for any reason, or no reason at all. However, there are a few "impermissible" reasons (e.g., because the employee filed a workers' comp claim after being injured on the job, or because they were a whistle-blower about certain issues, etc.). Similarly, I don't think prosecutors can legally be fired for refusing to bring a false indictment against a political rival.

I prefer women who I'm happy to wake up next to the next morning.

Posted by ness_gadol

Funny thing about those medical cadavers... they really can't go anywhere...

You creepy fuck.

Rob

Would you please explain to my poor old addled brain why the idea of universal medical coverage is so terrible.

(i.e. aside from the age old "waiting 6 months ").

A nation that can spend a trillion $ on a recreational war is too poor to provide medical care to our have nots ? (and yes, that includes the illegal Mexicans that some of us hate so much).

dog watch in a mirror when you are fucking the bitch doggy style?

Posted by truthhurts at 2007-08-27 01:30 PM | Reply

You must be a real hoot at all of the peace rallies...

"I've never had a set of balls or a cock rubbed against my face...

Posted by Rob_The_A_Hole at 2007-08-27 01:44 PM"

Rob was the rubber, not the rubee. (Truth be told, he was a voyeur, not a playa, during these hijinx.)

Man, you're a real piece of work. Comparing feeding to sleep deprivation?

You said sleep deprevation can kill... well so can Chicken Wings in the following ways:

Choking on the bone (you sound like you know all about that)
Cholesterol
Dehydration from severe diahrrea
salmonella if not cooked properly

And your wife is a doctor?

Posted by ness_gadol

A phenominal surgeon...

How could you not know all that about chicken wings... You must be a shitty med student. Is "D = Degree" on your wall...

Man I love Affirmative Action!!!

JeffJ:

None of those things are as bad as torture has been historically. But what I ask myself is: At what point do we as a species decide that intentionally doing negative things to fellow humans is no longer acceptable? Sure, we can justify these actions all day long. That doesn't negate the fact that, at the end of the day, person A just put person B through pain intentionally.

What would Jesus do?

101- sure you don't mean "piece rallies"?

Rob was the rubber, not the rubee.

Posted by mOntecOre

THANK YOU!!!

Its not gay if your the one hitting other people with your slapper.

Funny if you a knew a dog with the same moniker with a taste for panty crotch.

Disturbing might be a better word, but yeah, it is.

ohhhh what a zinger man i bet hes just gonna be ate up all day...

Up to your typical argumentative say nothing do nothing work week Ass hole?

Even Bush would occasionally say "Why am I surrounded by idiots" and get rid of them as he did with Brownie. More often, the good and competent people in the Bush administration like O'Neill, Whitman and Powell, even Ashcroft -- all long since gone -- would say "Why are we surrounding an idiot?" as they left.

We have now inevitably reached the endgame where only idiots are left surrounding an idiot. This is why it takes so long for any of them to actually leave. Everyone is standing around saying "Umm, gee willikers, what do we do now?"

There is an alternative explanation. It is that the last thing anybody with an impeccable record of honesty and competence would want to do is go work for these corrupt losers.

"Choking on the bone (you sound like you know all about that)

Posted by Rob_The_A_Hole at 2007-08-27 01:50 PM"

I laughed, but was immediately ashamed at myself. No FF!

"...the Rodeo is when you bring a fat ugly bitch home to fuck her, but unknown to her you've got 5 friends waiting in the closet or another room..."

That's a horrible way to describe yer significant "other".

"That's a horrible way to describe yer significant "other".

Posted by Dave at 2007-08-27 01:53 PM"

Given that I was one of the poor 5, you can't accuse Rob of being inaccurate.

"a dog...with a taste for panty crotch."

Many dogs do that. I had a Basenji who was so agressive she'd almost do it while the gal was still wearing them.

I shit black this morning after eating 50 Golden Neck Clams smothered in a bottle of Red Hot and 3 ears of corn.

Would you please explain to my poor old addled brain why the idea of universal medical coverage is so terrible.

I think the added beauracracy in getting paid will drive a lot of good doctors out of practice.

the biggest newsflash for a lot of people is that people don't become doctors to help people... sure they'll tell you that in the interviews, but I'm around doctors all the time... too fucking often if you ask me, and no not just my ol' lady... they became doctors partly to help people, but also partly to have power and get paid. You start fucking with that and the smartest and talented students who would have gone into medicine will go into Law or some other area...

And you'll also start to see the older Docs opting for early retirement.

Then there is the issue of added wait times...

However Yo, the biggest reason for me is this:

I can afford my own healthcare and the healthcare of my family, same with my parents, brother and sisters and friends. Why the fuck should I have to pay for you? I'm not special, I'm not anything great... if I can do it, you can do it.

Now comes the part where the Iranian med student tells us how he's pulling in poon by the crate

I'm American. My father was Iranian.

Funny thing about those medical cadavers... they really can't go anywhere...

You creepy fuck.

You're the one who brought up necrophilia. Got something you want to tell us?

A phenominal surgeon...

Cool; she can afford to buy you a nice dictionary.

well so can Chicken Wings in the following ways:

I really hope you're being facetious. (You can look that up in your new dictionary)

Rob-

I'm not saying that the attorneys should get their jobs back. I'm saying that just because you serve "at the pleasure" of someone else does not mean that you can or should be fired for any reason at all.

Your "analysis" seems to be missing a few elements. Let's review it.

"Have presidents fired attorneys for no reason before? Yes."

Was it for no reason this time? Frankly I'd rather be fired for no reason than, just for example, being fired for my political leanings. Why do you compare the recent firing of US attorneys to instances in which they were fired for "no reason" when there is no proof that they were fired for no reason this time? The very reasons they were fired are being covered up. Why?

"Did they get in trouble for it (in the past)? No."

Were there allegations by the attorneys themselves that they were fired for failing to pursue cases against high-profile opposing party politicians that did not have merit? If not, then why do you act as though the situations are equal?

"Is the president allowed to fire attorneys? Yes."

By law, he can fire them. Should he fire them for failing to embarrass opposing party politicians with meritless charges, thereby setting a standard that US attorneys may not pursue cases based on their own judgment, and must instead pursue or avoid them based on whether the target has a (D) or (R) next to their name? Probably not. While it isn't against the law, it doesn't satisfy what should be a central tenet of law enforcement - objectivity.

I don't expect you to understand that. You want to side with Bush and Gonzales, so you look to the letter of the law and say that what they did wasn't illegal. Calling your grandmother a cunt probably isn't illegal either, but that doesn't make it right.

Its not gay if your the one hitting other people with your slapper.

True. If they're women, that is.

You and your kind just don't get it do you Wobbie?

The Constitution recognizes that man has an inherent right, not bestowed by the state or laws, to personal dignity, including the right to be free of cruelty. It applies to all human beings, not just in America--even those designated as unlawful enemy combatants.'

Do we believe in the Constitution or not? Do not all these leaders swear an oath to defend the Constitution or not?

"To my mind, there's no moral or practical distinction," he told me. "If cruelty is no longer declared unlawful, but instead is applied as a matter of policy, it alters the fundamental relationship of man to government. It destroys the whole notion of individual rights. The Constitution recognizes that man has an inherent right, not bestowed by the state or laws, to personal dignity, including the right to be free of cruelty. It applies to all human beings, not just in America--even those designated as unlawful enemy combatants.' If you make this exception, the whole Constitution crumbles. It's a transformative issue."

-Alberto J. Mora, the outgoing general counsel of the United States Navy

Calling your grandmother a cunt probably isn't illegal either, but that doesn't make it right.

No, it's not right.

True, but not right.

I'm American. My father was Iranian.

So much for the Patriot Act...

Cool; she can afford to buy you a nice dictionary

Nah, she's just a resident... I kick the crap out of her paycheck...

Got something you want to tell us?

You smell like falafal and no woman will ever touch your curry flavored mule?

Seriously, it was jet black.

You want to side with Bush and Gonzales, so you look to the letter of the law and say that what they did wasn't illegal. Calling your grandmother a cunt probably isn't illegal either, but that doesn't make it right.

Posted by JOE

I never said it was right... just that it wasn't illegal and its wrong depending on your point of view.

By law, he can fire them

Exactly! So the whole reason the Bush Admin got in this mess, Gonzales specifically, was because they tried to dance around and cover up what they did. If they had just come out and been honest about it, things would have been a lot less messy. Sure liberals would have shit themselves, but what else is new... Ness is covered in crap right now because I compared chicken wings to sleep deprevation... or it could be cuz he's Iranian, I don't know for sure.

Seriously, it was jet black.

Probably an upper GI bleed. Do you have a history of ulcers? Do you take baby aspirin daily?

Do we believe in the Constitution or not? Do not all OUR leaders swear an oath to defend the Constitution?

Once they step outside the bounds of the Constitution they are violating their oath of office and should step down.

No one ever said it was going to be easy and it is too bad that Gonzales put his party over country..but Better Late than Never!

Bush and Cheney are also operating outside the bounds of the Constitution and it will come back to byte them too.

Yea America!!!

what a good day for America and the US Constitution!

too bad for you Woobie and you Torture Lovers

Unless you saw an image of the Virgin Mary in it 101, no one cares.

"Ness is covered in crap right now

Posted by Rob_The_A_Hole at 2007-08-27 02:07 PM"

What color is it?
101Chairborne

The very reasons they were fired are being covered up. Why?

Because they didn't have the balls to just come out and say we fired them because we wanted to. As you point out they are allowed to fire them... but they were stupid and thought they could lie about the reasons and no one would notice.

Probably an upper GI bleed. Do you have a history of ulcers? Do you take baby aspirin daily?

Posted by ness_gadol

Don't listen to punjab here 101... the guy didn't even know chicken wings are bad for you...

www.antiwar.com

this is torture, and now legal.

"the guy didn't even know chicken wings are bad for you...

Posted by Rob_The_A_Hole at 2007-08-27 02:11 PM"

Luckily, Rob knew all the ins and outs and danger of choking on the bone.

Probably an upper GI bleed. Do you have a history of ulcers? Do you take baby aspirin daily?

Posted by ness_gadol at 2007-08-27 02:08 PM | Reply

No and no. I drank a bunch of beer, ate a bunch of corn, and decimated a bunch of clams...No stomach problems that I'm aware of. I will add however that I was drinking Genesee.

So much for the Patriot Act...

It was 1982. There was no such thing.

Nah, she's just a resident...

What year? Specialty or general? Resident pay is totally shit, I agree.

You smell like falafal and no woman will ever touch your curry flavored mule?

I hate falafel. And my mule has been ridden for a while now. I dunno what it tastes like, but the women I've been with generally like spicy food, so maybe curry isn't a bad thing...

www.antiwar.com

this is torture, and now legal.

Posted by truthhurts

Why didn't he just pull himself up and lie on that object he was tied to? He would have been a lot more comfortable.

Unless you saw an image of the Virgin Mary in it 101, no one cares.

Posted by SanAntonioRogue at 2007-08-27 02:08 PM | Reply

Come to think of it one of the turds did look like Gary Coleman. I'm pretty sure he's a virgin...Unless truthhurts has some news for us?

Tad-did you knock out your wet nurse again? You know they don't like letting you near a computer!

They're still trying to get the urine stink off the last one you played with.....

What year? Specialty or general?

Ortho... 4th year... 1 more to go... then a fellowship... then maybe I can fucking retire.

(Cuz my days are really difficult I know...)

www.antiwar.com

this is torture, and now legal.

Posted by truthhurts at 2007-08-27 02:12 PM | Reply

What you call torture I call Friday night!
Sincerely,
Donnerboy

Rob has been going on about "They" all day -

"they" are allowed to fire them, "they" were stupid and thought "they" could lie about it.

Who are "they" ?

Harriet Miers and Laura Bush?

the guy didn't even know chicken wings are bad for you...

I never said that. I said it's retarded to compare feeding a prisoner to actively abusing them.

From this thread, I can see that nuance is totally lost on you, Kemosabe.

Who are "they" ?

Presidents... "they" are presidents... past, present, future... they are allowed to fire attorneys

Holy crap...

I think we found a guy with that Pete Rose haircut I was talking about earlier...

Chair,

My 3-year old son likes to eat corn because he likes to see the kernels in his shit.

*I am dead serious*

Luckily, Rob knew all the ins and outs and danger of choking on the bone.

Posted by mOntecOre

HEY!! No joke stealing...

(I did like the "Ins and outs" part though, so I'm giving it a FF anyways)

Ortho... 4th year... 1 more to go

I did a couple of weeks of peds ortho last month...totally fascinating. I'm not into surgery at all, but of the procedures that I've seen, those were the most interesting.

Good for her though, those hours are hella-shitty. And from what I've heard, it's pretty intensely competitive. She'll be making bank when she's out of school...then you really can retire and annoy us here even more than you already do.

No and no.I drank a bunch of beer, ate a bunch of corn, and decimated a bunch of clams...No stomach problems that I'm aware of. I will add however that I was drinking Genesee.

Posted by 101Chairborne at 2007-08-27 02:13 PM | Reply | Flag

Why didn't he just pull himself up and lie on that object he was tied to? He would have been a lot more comfortable.

Posted by Rob_The_A_Hole

ok rob, if the actions at rob are so innocent, how come bush called them reprehensible and apologized for them?

Camp Gitmo, right, the actions really arent that bad, right?

how come bush called them reprehensible and apologized for them?

if they were so innocent, how could the US SOLDIERS!!! use as a defense that the actions were so innocent when the CiC called the actions REPREHENSIBLE!!!!!!!!

I like how TH posts a picture, labels it torture and provides no linking as to its source, how long the guy was in that position, with what looks to be underwear on his head, etc.

My 3-year old son likes to eat corn because he likes to see the kernels in his shit.

*I am dead serious*

Posted by JeffJ

Fucking-A I need to grow up... the other day I ate a can of corn hobo style (just opened it enough to peel back the top), for just the same reason... well it had also been a couple days and I figured I needed to get things moving...

they were stupid and thought they could lie about the reasons and no one would notice.

Posted by Rob_The_A_Hole at 2007-08-27 02:09 PM

They knew we would notice..certainly the Attorneys would notice and they are lawyers after all.

Fact is, Bushco could care less that we noticed. They thought they could get away with it. In their Imperialistic glee that thought it was the "right" thing to do. And no one could do anything to stop them.

Bush lives in a parallel universe along with Woobie, Bowa and Sniper etc.

The President of the US is not the King of the US. Bush and company have forgotten (or probably never really learned) that without the support of the people the Presidency is nothing but a lame duck. The Presidents job is to SUPPORT and DEFEND the Constitution NOT continually try and subvert it.

This Presidency is slowly crumbling. Bush is getting what he has earned. Indeed this President (and Vice President) deserve to be Impeached...THAT would be the "right" thing to do.

ok rob, if the actions at rob are so innocent, how come bush called them reprehensible and apologized for them?

Misunderstanding?

Come to think of it one of the turds did look like Gary Coleman. I'm pretty sure he's a virgin...

What'chu talkin' 'bout, Willis?

This Presidency is slowly crumbling. Bush is getting what he has earned. Indeed this President (and Vice President) deserve to be Impeached...THAT would be the "right" thing to do.

Posted by donnerboy

There's 16 months left big guy... get over it... its not gonna happen.

if they were so innocent, how could the US SOLDIERS!!! use as a defense that the actions were so innocent when the CiC called the actions REPREHENSIBLE!!!!!!!!

TH,

First and foremost, wipe the spittle off your chin.

Rob and I are not the ones saying the soldiers at Abu Graihb were innocent. Quite the contrary, it is you who is claiming that they are innocent under the law (Bush's supposed law) but yet these same soldiers who you claim are innocent according to this law, were in fact found guilty.

You are really off your game today.

No stomach problems that I'm aware of.

Sounds like you just got one.

ratemypoo.com

It will provide you and your son hours of entertainment. In 10 years you can show him ratemyrack.com...

how come bush called them reprehensible and apologized for them?

Do you believe him? Because if you do then you can't question anything he says.

You can't have it both ways.

"but they were stupid and thought they could lie about the reasons and no one would notice."

Yet now they've lied, admittedly, and have two other lies currently on the table: We don't know who compiled that list, and We don't know why that list was compiled. Why do you feel Americans don't deserve the truth, from---of all entities---The Justice Department?

"No and no. I...ate a bunch of corn....

Posted by 101Chairborne at 2007-08-27 02:13 PM"

But there were no yellow kernels in your tar baby? They must be hiding in your small intestine, wondering what happened to the neighborhood.

well it had also been a couple days and I figured I needed to get things moving...

What did you expect when you were playing with this?

"....with what looks to be underwear on his head, etc."

Oh, pleeeease...we're NOT doing panties on heads again, are we? I never understood why everyone got so upset about that. I can remember having a lot of fun with putting panties on my own head in my younger days. Don't tell me you never did it.

But there were no yellow kernels in your tar baby? They must be hiding in your small intestine, wondering what happened to the neighborhood.

Posted by mOntecOre at 2007-08-27 02:26 PM | Reply

I'm ashamed to admit I didn't look for the corn, I was just shocked at the color of my hand after wiping.
Sincerely,
101Achmed

The Only Good Thing I Can Say He Wasn't A Damn Chicken Hawk Just A Lying Torturer !

Yes When You Lie To A Federal Agent It Is A Crime, Period !!

You Don't Become A Lawyer By Not Remembering Shit !!!

He Fired Those Guys After First Saying They "Were Doing A Great Job", "Then He Said They Were All Performance Driven",Then He Said "It Was Executive Privilege" Then He Said It Was Neither !!

One Of Those Guys Was Serving Here In Arkansas He Has Been On The Radio Many Times And Outlined The Entire Story, So GONZO Is A Liar Period !!

-Sarge

101 - remind me to do a short bow when I meet you, and to avoid the traditional handshake.

Chair,

I am familiar with (although I've never actaully gone to the site) ratemypoo.com

"One Of Those Guys Was Serving Here In Arkansas He Has Been On The Radio Many Times And Outlined The Entire Story, So GONZO Is A Liar Period !!"

Hey, Sarge...are we to assume then that NOBODY in Arkansas lies???

There's 16 months left big guy... get over it... its not gonna happen.

Posted by Rob_The_A_Hole at 2007-08-27 02:23 PM

I don't know Woobie-

We have seen three of the Great Untouchables fall.

Rumsfeld
Rove
and now Gonzales

I have always said that you have to go through Gonazales to get to Bush or Cheney.

And Impeachment would be the right thing to do for America.

One thing is for sure it will real interesting to see the hearings for the next AG.

Gonna be some real interesting questions regarding duty to the Country and the Constitution verses duty to the President. And you can bet the possibility of Impeachment will be behind a lot of those types of questions.

Am I the only one who finds it truly appropriate that the thread about Gonzales has turned into a thread about shit?

Hey, Sarge...are we to assume then that NOBODY in Arkansas lies???

Of course not, especially when they call into a radio program :-(

"I've never had a set of balls or a cock rubbed against my face...

Posted by Rob_The_A_Hole at 2007-08-27 01:44 PM"

I'm sure one of the Christian Right conservative leaders would be happy to oblige you, if your comment was a lament.

We have seen three of the Great Untouchables fall.

Rumsfeld
Rove
and now Gonzales

All resigned, not thrown out of office...

We have seen three of the Great Untouchables fall.

Rumsfeld
Rove
and now Gonzales

Untouchable??? says who? How many presidential appointees do NOT make it both terms? Quite a few I think.

"Of course not, especially when they call into a radio program :-("

I'm originally from Joplin, MO, just across the Arkansas border, and I always believed those guys from Arkansas.

Rob and I are not the ones saying the soldiers at Abu Graihb were innocent

Here's a little made up play about how I think the whole Abu Graihb thing should have gone down:

SOLDIERS: Sir, we feel it necessary to report to your that under some definitions we may have tortured some prisoners.

GENERAL: Sweet merciful crap, son, why would you torture Americans!?!

SOLDIERS: No, sir, they were just Arabs.

GENERAL: Pass the glow stick.

Don't tell me you never did it.

Posted by jestgettinalong at 2007-08-27 02:28 PM

You think that it is FUNNY that America has resorted to torture?

Its not a joke. The following is an excerpt from the New Yorker Mag.

Speaking of the tactics that he had heard about, Brant told me, "Repugnant would be a good term to describe them."

Much of Brant's information had been supplied by an N.C.I.S. psychologist, Michael Gelles, who worked with the C.I.T.F. and had computer access to the Army's interrogation logs at Guantnamo. Brant told me that Gelles "is phenomenal at unlocking the minds of everyone from child abusers to terrorists"; he took it seriously when Gelles described the logs as shocking.

The logs detailed, for example, the brutal handling of a Saudi detainee, Mohammed al-Qahtani, whom an F.B.I. agent had identified as the "missing twentieth hijacker"--the terrorist who was supposed to have been booked on the plane that crashed in a Pennsylvania field. Qahtani was apprehended in Afghanistan a few months after the terrorist attacks.

Qahtani had been subjected to a hundred and sixty days of isolation in a pen perpetually flooded with artificial light. He was interrogated on forty-eight of fifty-four days, for eighteen to twenty hours at a stretch. He had been stripped naked; straddled by taunting female guards, in an exercise called "invasion of space by a female"; forced to wear women's underwear on his head, and to put on a bra; threatened by dogs; placed on a leash; and told that his mother was a whore. By December, Qahtani had been subjected to a phony kidnapping, deprived of heat, given large quantities of intravenous liquids without access to a toilet, and deprived of sleep for three days. Ten days before Brant and Mora met, Qahtani's heart rate had dropped so precipitately, to thirty-five beats a minute, that he required cardiac monitoring.

www.newyorker.com

All resigned, not thrown out of office...

Posted by Rob_The_A_Hole at 2007-08-27 02:37 PM

LOL that is so funny. Oh yeah they just got bored with all that power...

Right.

You think that it is FUNNY that America has resorted to torture?

Depends on the torture... Waterboarding no funny... making people form a human pyramid... yeah that's kind of funny.

"Hey, Sarge...are we to assume then that NOBODY in Arkansas lies???"

Well let me put it to like this, the guys says he received a "Stellar Performance Report" then he gets fired ! Oh then just by chance one of Rove's Buddies who just happens to be a JAG just returning for Iraq and he gets the Job. Oh My what a coincidence ? Then GONZO gets up in-front of the World and said the Firings were due to "Poor Performance". So Guess What, I would put GONZO as the Liar.

-Sarge

LOL that is so funny.

Not as funny as torture, but yeah, I could see why you would laugh at that.

You said impeachment and then pointed to those three as to why it could happen... Impeachment does not equal resignation big guy.

Sorry about the Double Post

-Sarge

"but they were stupid and thought they could lie about the reasons and no one would notice."

And you say "they" are Presidents, Rob, so what you are really saying is:

Bush was stupid and thought he could lie about the reasons and nobody would notice. Right?

That sounds reasonable.

How many presidential appointees do NOT make it both terms? Quite a few I think.

Posted by eberly at 2007-08-27 02:38 PM

Hmm In the middle of a War for Civilization?

me thinks not. Me thinks that the questions were getting too pointed the pressure was too great and Congress was getting close to Impeaching Gonzales.

Why do you think they resigned? Better job offers?

"but they were stupid and thought they could lie about the reasons and no one would notice."

And you say "they" are Presidents

No, in this particular instance "They" is the President, Gonzales and a few others involved in firing these particular attorneys.

In other posts when I said they can fire attorneys, that was referring to Presidents... sorry I was confused on what you meant in your question.

"You think that it is FUNNY that America has resorted to torture?"

The girls kinda thought it was funny when I put their panties on my head. I had no idea I was involved in torture.

Hmm In the middle of a War for Civilization?

me thinks not.

How many military commanders did Lincoln go through?

Impeachment does not equal resignation big guy.

Posted by Rob_The_A_Hole at 2007-08-27 02:46 PM

one word

Nixon

Why do you think they resigned? Better job offers?

Posted by donnerboy

They were political liabilities to the President and the GOP.

They were in no danger of being thrown out of office by the congress... they just had abismal ratings with the American people.

Do you have evidence of impeachment proceedings being brought up against all three to prove that the three of them were certain of conviction and therefore had no choice but to take a Nixonian style resignations to avoid the embarassment of impeachment? Please, by all means present it...

Why do you think they resigned? Better job offers?

Well, in case you didn't know...those 3 can make 1,000 times as much in the private sector. they have enough fame to write their books and give their speeches. This in addition to their consulting opportunities and Board of Director positions being offered to them.

yes, the heat got too hot. I'm not defending them for anything but that it isn't some earth shattering event if those guys don't make it through Bush's term.

HC is no longer an absolute, it is now at the whim of bush, ie if he decides you are an illegal combatant.

it was not a presidential authority, now it is his to decide upon.

Posted by truthhurts at 2007-08-27 01:19 PM

HC does not apply to "Enemy combatants"--Lincoln waived HC too during the civil war--to American Citizens!

Bush has been very restrained--unlike FDR who locked up Japenese Americans in camps.

------
America tortures, and it makes me smile. I love the fact that right now somebody darker than an Italian is getting waterboarded for no other reason than he or she is a muslim. I hope they're kid is forced to watch.

Posted by 101Chairborne at 2007-08-27 01:21 PM

Funny FLag for 101 ! You infidel you!

And for TH--the soldiers who committed the Abu Grahib--were in fact convicted and serving up to 9 years in hard labor--all of them--

We do not torture--but go on believing what liberal sites tell you.

Murphy

"So Guess What, I would put GONZO as the Liar."

And that surprises you??? Don't you know that every azzhole there in D.C. is a liar? Please tell me you're not gonna say that the democrats are ethical and tell the truth.

How many military commanders did Lincoln go through?

How many of my boots will go thru yer ass?

one word

Nixon

Posted by donnerboy

Nixon would have been convicted... You're gonna get 15 GOP senators plus Lieberman to vote for Conviction in the Senate?

LMAO!!! Oh what a burden you must have been to your parents growing up. So many ruined family photos, with your giant tounge hanging out while still wearing your water wings even though your family didn't own a pool.

How many of my boots will go thru yer ass?

Posted by FRANKC0TT0N

OH YOU WANT SOME TOUGH GUY!?!?!? Well here's what you do, fly to jersey, get on the turnpike...

LMAO...

How many military commanders did Lincoln go through?

Posted by Rob_The_A_Hole at 2007-08-27 02:49 PM

That was a Civil war not a War for Civilization.

I take this one is a Planetary War. Fact is, if this President honored his commitment to Support and Defend the Constitution over his Cronies he would have FIRED them ALL long ago.

But, like you lil Woobie he lives in another state. A State of Denial.

And Please! Don't even try and equal Bush and Lincoln (don't even use them in the same sentence it is disrespectful of Lincoln's memory. Bush is not fit to wipe Abraham Lincoln's ass.

You're gonna get 15 GOP senators plus Lieberman to vote for Conviction in the Senate?

It must be fun to chase your tail for 8 years and never catch it. I don't think I will try it though.

Nah, you're a pussy cause your wife does all the work while you dick around on here all day.

Posted by ness_gadol

I missed this earlier... why would this make me a pussy?

"How many of my boots will go thru yer ass?"

No need to worry. He doesn't own any boots, Rob, those are his mother's boots he's wearing.

It must be fun to chase your tail for 8 years and never catch it. I don't think I will try it though.

Posted by eberly

I don't think they would even get 50 votes for conviction... You wouldn't get one GOP senator to vote that way, Lieberman wouldn't, then there are the two Nelsons and a couple other centrist Democrats... Hell I doubt even Harry Reid would vote for conviction... he comes from a really red state.

"That was a Civil war not a War for Civilization."

That wasn't a civil war. A civil war takes place when a population attempts to overthrow the sitting government. The war that began in 1961 was an invasion of one country into another. Those of us down here correctly call it the "War of Northern Aggression."

OH YOU WANT SOME TOUGH GUY!?!?!

I'll fly to Camden and stomp yuor wheezing ass into a grease stain! You'll get punched more than an ATM machine!

"In a telephone interview from Memphis on Monday, [Rep. Steve] Cohen said he and his staff are working with former Reagan Justice Department lawyer Bruce Fein to draw up articles of impeachment against Atty. Gen. Alberto Gonzales," wrote the paper's Bartholomew Sullivan.

Rep. Jay Inslee (D-WA) recently introduced a measure that called on the House Judiciary Committee to investigate whether the Attorney General had committed any impeachable offenses.

Additionally, Rep. Maurice Hinchey (D-NY) and Senator Russ Feingold (D-WI) both introduced censure measures against the President, Vice President Dick Cheney, and Gonzales on Monday.

Also, Reps. Adam Schiff (D-CA) and Artur Davis (D-AL) in May proposed a 'no confidence' motion against the Attorney General which has so far garnered 121 additional co-sponsors.

Cohen is a co-sponsor of all of these earlier measures. He also signed on to Rep. Dennis Kucinich's Article of Impeachment against Vice President Cheney.

Donner... you can impeach all you want... impeach the whole damn cabinet... you need a conviction.

Dag-gum-it Frank Cotton is the greatest poster ever...

"And that surprises you??? Don't you know that every azzhole there in D.C. is a liar? Please tell me you're not gonna say that the democrats are ethical and tell the truth."

I learned a long time ago that they are "All Crooks and Liars" I don't trust Any of them as I can throw them. I just see the NEOCONS as the Worst of The Worst.

-Sarge

those are his mother's boots he's wearing.

Yeah, her feet are still in them. After I'm finished with Rob the fucknut, I'm gonna curb yer sorry ass like I did to that ugly chick in the wheelchair this morning.

At least 11 members of Congress were ready to sign on with Cohen.

Gonzales was being primed for Impeachment.

That is why he stepped down... now go ahead and try and spin it...

Cohen is a co-sponsor of all of these earlier measures. He also signed on to Rep. Dennis Kucinich's Article of Impeachment against Vice President Cheney

How does your tail taste? Oh, you've never gotten to it.

Keep trying.

That is why he stepped down... now go ahead and try and spin it...

Posted by donnerboy

Bill Clinton was impeached... did he leave office? No... why? Because a conviction was impossible.

Looks like there is hope of the usa

Looks like there is hope for the usa

Gonzales was being primed for Impeachment.

So, you can see into the future. You're a godamn fortune teller and know the inner workings of D.C.? Well then, you should be able to picture my teabag on yer forehead right before the lights go out permanently.

At least 11 members of Congress were ready to sign on with Cohen.

Gonzales was being primed for Impeachment.

That is why he stepped down... now go ahead and try and spin it...

Donner, you don't know anything. Nothing. NADA. Unfortunately you are interpreting this to be a defense for GWB. It isn't. Impeach him for all I care. He is a liar and he's full of shit (go figure - a politician??)

Ideology is getting the better of you.

OH YOU WANT SOME TOUGH GUY!?!?!

I'll fly to Camden and stomp yuor wheezing ass into a grease stain! You'll get punched more than an ATM machine!

Posted by FRANKC0TT0N at 2007-08-27 03:04 PM |

Damn, Frankie, good to see you're back!br />

Frank--you are toooo funny!

And they weren't going for impeachment--cupcake--they were going to Censure Gonzo.

And he should be gone--I don't think anyone would be able to take another sworn in testimony with that guy.

And what would that done--?? Nothing!

So now he's leaving--move on already--same thing for the Dems--they are all puking that this guy is leaving and they have to move on.

Murphy

Frank,

There's a gentleman here to speak with you. Something about a puzzle?

Shut up, Chris!

I've been down in Laredo booting beaners back over the border. I half expected to see you there. What are you? Too panocha?

Funny you should post that, Darko. Hellraiser is on my old dead granny's headstone. Now piss off!

Hellraiser?? Pretty scary movie.

Frank--you are such an infidel!

Murphy

Hmmm... seems like this thread is spent... shriveled up like my johnson after I spent an hour in Frank Cotton's old lady. Man that twat loves it in the can...

Funny you should post that, Darko. Hellraiser is on my old dead granny's headstone. Now piss off!

Fair enough. I should be going anyway.

My lunch has regained consiousness and is trying to flag down the police.

Rob!

Today I'm gonna bang twice! First yer wife then yer head into the floor!

Today I'm gonna bang twice! First yer wife then yer head into the floor!

Posted by LeeAtwater

No matter how many times I read that I still almost piss myself laughing.

Steal another one of my lines Lee and you'll be as dead as yer namesake! You hear me!!

Donner, you don't know anything. Nothing. NADA

Posted by eberly at 2007-08-27 03:16 PM

well I guess YOU sure proved that...NOT

Actually, Gonzo stepping down proves the opposite is more likely true.

Now it is time to go for the big fish...it is the only thing that will convince Bush he is NOT the Emperor of America.

Steal another one of my lines Lee and you'll be as dead as yer namesake! You hear me!!

Frank, may I offer a piece of advice?

Murder is always more fun when they don't see it coming.

No matter how many times I hear "Why are you doing this to me?", it never gets old.

And then there is my second favourite:

"Please, I have a wife and children."

Sometimes I almost don't have the heart to show them that I got their wife and kids first.

I'm saying they had the power to do it, not that it was right, or will be right when the next president does it, just that they have the power to do it, and they were stupid for trying to cover it up.

Yes, Wob other President's have fired their own USA appointees before.

Yes, the President has the right to hire and fire at will.

Except the President doesn't have the right to politicise the Justice Department to the point of firing USAs who wouldn't selectively prosecute Dems to give the GOPhers an elective edge.

Using a provision in the Patriot Act that by-passed Sente Confirmation Dumbya installed flunkies he knew would tow the party line, some like Tim Griffin who had previously been implicated in a variety of dirty tricks at the behest of Karl Rove, including caging minority voters.

That's wot makes this case different, Rob.

Alberto Gonzales obviously intentional memory loss on the stand assures his complicity on this affair.

Monigoo taking a deal and then still pleading the fifth on the question of who originated the list of hires and fires was also instructive.

Monigoo, btw was the Gal who sent the caging lists to Griffin in e-mails.

Now, they are all walking away like they never did anything wrong.

DC is just so fucking corrupt these days it's scary.

Scary, Spud tells ya!

Be Well.

Rev.

If you wasn't a godamn foreigner...I'll tell you what, I'll let you live but I will only crack yer scull. That's the best I can do.

Ah, Frank...

Would it help you to know that I am, in fact NOT a foreigner? I've just travelled a lot and have lived outside the US.

Makes finding my...collection of tonsils...a little more interesting.

I can afford my own healthcare and the healthcare of my family, same with my parents, brother and sisters and friends. Why the fuck should I have to pay for you? I'm not special, I'm not anything great... if I can do it, you can do it.

Posted by Rob_The_A_Hole

I can do it too Rob (paid into SS and medical premiums for 39 years). My take is that life is valued, even when it belongs to a have not.

At any rate, thanks for your comments, they were reasonable. (and we dint call each other names).

Gonzo's Replacement: The Hillary Factor
by Steve Kornacki

Published: August 27, 2007

Tags: Politics, Hillary Clinton, Michael Chertoff

Here, via the Washington Post's campaign blog, is Hillary Clinton's response to Alberto Gonzales' resignation as Attorney General and the rumors that Michael Chertoff is in line to replace him:

Without naming him, Clinton also took a swipe at Homeland Security chief Michael Chertoff, who is rumored as a possible choice to lead the department.

"The second anniversary of Hurricane Katrina is one more reminder that the President must appoint someone to lead the Department of Justice with the leadership and competence necessary to defend the Constitution," she wrote.

Clinton's potential opposition to Chertoff is noteworthy because it could provide her a unique opportunity to tend to personal and political imperatives simultaneously.

Recall that the former First Lady has a history with Chertoff, who served as the lead G.O.P. Counsel to the Senate committee that investigated Whitewater in the mid-1990s -- and perhaps nothing makes Hillary Clinton more irate than the memory of that probe. Indeed, he cast the lone Senate vote against Chertoff's nomination to the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals in 2003, citing his Whitewater conduct as her rationale.

If President Bush does nominate Chertoff for Attorney General, Hillary will have plenty of ammunition to go after him, as her Katrina comment today demonstrated. And in going after him, she would undoubtedly score points with the Democratic base (especially if she took a leading role in any nomination fight), thereby burnishing her primary season credentials. At the same time, of course, she'd also be getting even with her old nemesis, especially her effort resulted in the death of his nomination.

It's also worth wondering what effect Clinton's opposition would have on the other Democratic Senators in the presidential race. With Clinton connecting Chertoff to Katrina, wouldn't Barack Obama, Joe Biden and Chris Dodd be obligated to oppose his nomination as well? Perhaps this is why the White House, which seemed initially to be telling reporters that Chertoff was the choice, is now putting out the word that no decisions have been made and other contenders -- Ted Olson, Larry Thompson -- are in the mix.

www.observer.com

"Bill Clinton was impeached... did he leave office? No... why? Because a conviction was impossible.

Posted by Rob_The_A_Hole at 2007-08-27 03:12 PM"

No, impeachment failed. (By the way, I agree with your posts above with regard to Bush & Cheney, but impeaching Gonzales was not beyond the realm of plausability. He had detractors on both sides of the aisle.)

He was impeached but the Senate failed to convict.
The House brings articles of impeachment which they did then the Senate holds a trial and the decide whether to convict or not. It think he avoided conviction by one vote.

The House brings articles of impeachment which they did then the Senate holds a trial and the decide whether to convict or not.

Nice work, Danni - you got it right.

It's both amazing and sad that so many DON'T understand how an impeachment works.

Sometimes I almost don't have the heart to show them that I got their wife and kids first.

Did you ever consider writing for movies?

That's a great tag line.

No matter how many times I read that I still almost piss myself laughing.

You might want to get that looked at...could be your prostate acting up from all those years of penile agitation.

Did you ever consider writing for movies?

That's a great tag line.

Thanks, Ness.

Actually, I've just started work on a book. If I can get it published, I'll let everyone know and I'll be happy to give everyone here a copy for free (plus $19.95 shipping and handling).

Good luck with that, Mr. Darko.

From seeing what my mother went through to get her books published, it's a royal pain in the ass. And those were just textbooks.

The joke is on the morons who vote for people like osama bin boo boo obama . The assholes on the left talk out their asses about Gonzales overlooking U.S. Constitutional rights of the people , while the left makes up constitutional rights to subvert Americans and their country . The only thing to straighten out this mess is a civil war , and sending these loosers packing .

Ah Rightnut, the voice of reason.

Of course, he hasn't been the same since he cut off his brother, Leftnut.

On Saturday 19 December 1998, President William Jefferson Clinton was impeached by the United States House of Representatives, becoming only the second President in U.S. History, and the only man popularly elected as President to have been so charged.

The House voted 228 to 206 to approve proposed Article I of Impeachment (Perjury before a Federal Grand Jury), and voted 221 to 212 to approve proposed Article III of Impeachment (Obstruction of Justice).

Although the impeachment process succeeded at the level of the House of Representatives, without the Senate's confirming action in this matter, no further action was taken.

Gonzales would probably have been impeached.

Cheney and Bush could still be impeached.

If Clinton could be Impeached for lying about a blow job Bush can be Impeached for lying and misleading us into war, authorizing illegal wiretaps and secret prisons and other various clever means of subverting the Constitution that he has sworn to support and defend.

Not saying its gonna happen but...

It ain't over til it's over.

""while the left makes up constitutional rights to subvert Americans and their country""

Which rights did we make up????
BTW, if it is a right you can't make it up, it already exists. You can protect a citizen's ability to enjoy that right but you really can't invent rights.

Impeachment is just a political process which has little or nothing to do with "high crimes and misdemeanors." It has more to do with the size of the majority of one party or the other.

With Gonzales, Rove and Libby out of the picture. The Dems in congress can't point fingers at anyone else's resignation. Oh my goodness! The Dems might actually have to do their job and actually legislate something. Oh and they now have to make peace with George W. Bush who can veto all of their legislation now they that there are no more smokescreen targets.

Sorry Dems, you won't be able to force Bush and Cheney's resignation and the conservatives on the Supreme Court have life tenure. Pucker up Dems and get ready to kiss some George W. Bush booty!!! Get to work do-nothing Dems and raise that historic low 18% approval rating. LMFAO!!!!

It will be interesting to see if the democrats have the balls to block any and all nominations UNTIL they get an acceptable nominee...

Guess what the first question (from bush) will be for those on the short list?

--Will you refuse to prosecute any contempt of congress charges that have or will arise from congressional oversight hearings; until the end of this presidents term ( even if the courts overrule the cliam of executive privilege in the matter)?

www.tpmmuckraker.com

It will be interesting also to see if anyone on the judiciary committee will ask if that question was asked and what was the nominees response if it was asked.

Equally as interesting is wheather or not mr. bush is arrogant enough to try to pull off a recess appointment.... may not be possible given the sept 17th effective date of the resignation... maybe there is another press conference coming...before the congress reconvenes...

lol

A. gonzales: "I have changed my mind... my resignation is effective immediately. NO QUESTIONS....hasta la vista....baby."

Sorry Dems, you won't be able to force Bush and Cheney's resignation and the conservatives on the Supreme Court have life tenure. Pucker up Dems and get ready to kiss some George W. Bush booty!!! Get to work do-nothing Dems and raise that historic low 18% approval rating. LMFAO!!!!

Posted by utastaff at 2007-08-27 05:31 PM

Enjoy your nervous little laugh?

today was a real nice gift for America.

The day you eat your nasty words will be a day of rejoicing and celebration and there will be dancing in the streets!

To those who say, 'Clinton and every other president replaced prosecutor's at will'.

A. It is every president's right to replace them. Most do at the beginning of their term, but not in the middle of their presidency because they aren't prosecuting the opposition to someone's satisfaction, or replaced for investigationg their own.

B. Until a clause was inserted in the 2006 renewal of the Patriot Act, replacement nominees were required to undergo confirmation. That is no longer the case according to this clause, which turns the process on it's head and eliminates confirmation by the Senate that's been the historical way things were done.

Looks like there is an interesting divide on this thread .....

bush supporters think that voter fraud is at least a very important legal issue for the DOJ....(at least by implication)

www.tpmmuckraker.com

And those that hoped for AG gonzales' impeachment and applaud his resignation think that election fraud may be MORE appropriate...and of course there is that sticky little issue of the 'patriot' act's provision for appointment of AG's without the consent of the senate. Wonder what the U.S. supreme court would have said about that provision? lol Would have been damed embarassing to lose that one I bet.

uspolitics.about.com

There is also an interesting contrast of the behaviors of AG gonzales(with respect to the AG firings) vs. AG reno ( with respect to the special prosecutor in the whitewater investigation). Did the law repealing the use of a special prosecutor in these types of cases make that much difference? If so we my need to reconsider its usefulness in insuring the DOJ returns to the status of "law firm" of the people rather than that of the president....

During an appearance on CNN, former US Attorney David Iglesias said Gonzales's resignation is "absolutely linked with Karl Rove leaving two weeks ago," and speculated the two resigned "for the same reason": Congressional investigators closing in on their suspected roles in the attorney-firing scandal.

yeah Eberly and woobie...

I don't have a clue huh?

'Bout time! Should have been fired 7 months ago.

Gonzales was an active apologist for torture. As such he helped to seriously degrade American and Western culture.

He doesn't need to be AG nor even a lawyer. He should help collect garbage for twenty years until he's again proved his usefulness as a human being.

Going... going... GONZO!!

Be Well.

PS: Don't go leaving town now, Al.

You aint done answering questions.

Not by a long shot.

Why are so many GOP Senators so Gay?

...and sending these loosers packing

Cost of logging onto the DR? Included with yer ISP costs.

Price to post? Free.

Reading Rightnut postage that tries to diss the left but mis-spells "loser"?

Priceless.

Be Well.

Republican Senator Craig said: "I should have had the advice of counsel in resolving this matter. In hindsight, I should not have pled guilty. I was trying to handle this matter myself quickly and expeditiously."

This guy is a US Senator and he doesn't know a) the value of legal council, and b) the ramifications of a guilty plea?!?

He should be tossed out on his ass yesterday.

Why are so many GOP Senators so Gay?

Is good question. Thanx fer the linkage.

Roll Call, a Capitol Hill newspaper, which first reported the case, said on its Web site Monday that Craig was arrested June 11 by a plainclothes officer investigating complaints of lewd conduct in a men's restroom at the airport.

Wots up with all the GOPhers getting nailed in public restrooms?

Of course, this does goes miles towards explaining the rumour that George Micheal is gonna be appearing as the entertainment at the next GOP convention.

Spud couldn't see the connection at first.

Be Well.

PS: Guess the first thing Obama is gonna hafta do when he moves into the WH is get some workmen in to spackle over all the glory holes that Dumbya had installed.

PPS: More seriously Spud has noticed a consistent thread in the whole "self loathing closeted gay Republican" weave.

Their religious upbringings and families facilitated their denial.

Just a spuddish observation.

I don't have a clue huh?

Posted by donnerboy

Exactly

This country will be paying for the mistakes and crimes of this idiotic administration for three generations or more. They have made us the laughing stock of the whole world. Bushnits and his dumb downed cohorts should be put on trial for being the miscreants that they are.

But I guess we don't put people on trial for being stupid, do we? Huh, do we?

Maybe we should begin with this "administration."

If the attorneys serve at the discretion of the President what difference does it make if they are replaced at the beggining or middle of the term? You libs are just making up arguments just bash bush because you need to put up smokescreens for Democrat controlled Congress with a historically low approval rating of 18%. The more Dems concentrate on investigating than leglislating that approval rating will continue to fall.

Please stop the impeachment crap. It is not going to happen. If impeachment reflects a horrible President, you must really hate William Jefferson Clinton.

Not to worry! The Leftist/Democratics have Bush and Cheney to revile and dehumanize; supporting terrorists in order to defame fellow Americans!!!

You can still gain votes by casting "neocons" into the status of "jews, gypsies, homosexuals, and other undesirables", and coming after them with verbal batons (in support of human sacrificing Islamic butchers to their bloodthirsty God ...

Go ahead! Call our president a dummy, or some other hateful epithet suited to the "liberal" philosophy of support for theocratic rule under Sharia and enforced by car bombs ...

How proud you Democratics must be in destroying your American enemies, eh? Alla ahkbar, and death to the infidel!

I consider myself a conservative. I consider you an imbecile. Jumpin' Jesus on a pogo stick man. Do you read what you type or copy it straight out of rush limbaugh news letter?

The president isn't a dummy, you're right about that. Nope, he's a fucking idiot. Incapable for forming coherant sentences without being coached? Check. Ability to look like a fool, even when he's not speaking? Check. Alienating decades-old alliances to pursue is own goals in "the war on terror". Check. Can't get a single story straight? Check.

Seriously. When politicians plan to lie about something, they have meetings. During these meetings, everyone takes some time to make sure they have the whole lie straight so there is no deviation from said lie. These fucknuts can't even do that right?

If the Dems approvals are falling, it's because they haven't been aggressive enough getting us out of Iraq.

Investigating is one of the reasons they were given back Congress to start with. And, my goodness, there are so many graves to exhume.

It's interesting to see that Fredo was almost equally hated among the Red Staters. One reason for this is that he high-lighted the subintelligence and bankrupt morality of his boss.

Alberto's resignation is a tremendous blow to GWB no matter how he tries to spin it. The obvious conclusion is that he had lost all credibility with Congress and the vast majority of the American people. Given that GWB placed so much faith in the guy only sharpens the publics perception that GWB is totally out of touch with American mainstream thought and belief.

He should help collect garbage for twenty years until he's again proved his usefulness as a human being.

Posted by Zed at 2007-08-27 08:04 PM | Reply | Flag:

Don't piss on garbage collectors like that. Gonzo should work at a texas ranch in August clearing brush for a penny an hour.

It is truly difficult to believe that Gonzales was once part of a the Texas Supreme Court, passed the bar, and was AG of the united states.

You would think that the filters would have caught his stupidity and kept him in the murky tank with the other immoral, moronic slime.

Hey libs, just catch your breath from all the excitment. LOL!

"White House Chief of Staff Joshua Bolten told senior aides that if they stayed past Labor Day they would be obliged to remain through the end of the president's term in January 2009."

online.wsj.com

Although this quote applies to senior aides, I am sure this is a senior administration wide mandate. Bush wants a team that will go into the final year with no interruptions. This is great timing because with Rumsefeld, Libby, Rove and Gonzales out of the picture, the Dems have NO targets for resignation going into the 2008 elections. The Dem controlled Congress is going to have to legislatively put up or shut up now that the smokescreen targets are out of the picture.

Wobbie!! It's not nice to attack someone when they're no around to defend themselves, if you don't beleive me, check the gay GOP bathroom thread.

But since you seem obsessed with my military service, why don't you provide ONE post of mine where I do what you are accusing me of.
Just ONE Wobbie. That's all I'm asking for.

Can you provide it, or is the bullshit you've been spewing about me just yet another Republican lie?

But then again (according to Verms calcultor)
99.999999999999999999999999999
9999999999% of what you post IS bullshit.

C'Mon Wobbie! A big brave Rightie like you should be able to find ONE post of mine that says anything even remotely close to what you have been saying about me.

Can't find one?
Man enough to apologize?
Didn't think so Sunshine.

Go ahead! Call our president a dummy, or some other hateful epithet suited to the "liberal" philosophy of support for theocratic rule under Sharia and enforced by car bombs ...

How proud you Democratics must be in destroying your American enemies, eh? Alla ahkbar, and death to the infidel!

Posted by tadowe at 2007-08-27 08:44 AM

tadowe -- I'm with you, Dubya is no DUMMY. He is POTUS. It's Rummy the dummy!

Shinseki told him what he need ed to do, and it's Shinseki who told him the truth that AQ was not hiding out in Iraq. But Rummy Dummy didn't lissen -- he fired Shinseki!

Turnabout is a bitch! Jail Rummy Dummy!

"Go ahead! Call our president a dummy, or some other hateful epithet suited to the "liberal" philosophy of support for theocratic rule under Sharia and enforced by car bombs ...

Tadowe"

Let's see.....

You're just sure that Iraqis, the vast majority Shiite (Arabs) and Kurdish (non Arabs) are just going to jump up and down to live under Sharia law.

The Sunni, who ARE in the same sect as Al Qaeda (Sunni) are shooting them as fast as they can find them to avoid just such a situation.

That leaves?

We're waiting with baited breath for you to explain that one.

"The Dem controlled Congress is going to have to legislatively put up or shut up now that the smokescreen targets are out of the picture"

Excellent, Staffy. I assume you've written to your Republican Representatives and Senators and asked them to stop blocking legislation then. Thanks!

(insults against me, or making fun of my sick mother not included as suitable answers)

Go ahead! Call our president a dummy,...

Tadowe"

He's a dummy. Among other things.

Special just coming on PBS about how world opinion has shifted against us due to Iraq.

He's either a dummy or an extremely gifted actor who has dedicated his legacy to fucking up the world.

I have to bite at Tadowes dare to call Bush a Dummy

All the other evidence aside, only a dummy would tolerate the discussion turning to invading Iraq at the first cabinet meeting after the 9/11 attacks.

Any past president would have been more focused on who did it, and then capturing and killing those responsible, not invading a country who didn't.

Newsweek has an article coming out next week that clearly shows the CIA had Bin Laden and Zawahiri located with teams in place to take him out. Even a box for Bin Laden's head. The CIA pleaded in person with Bush to give the go ahead. Read what happened next:

www.msnbc.msn.com

AmericanUnity: Great article but such a massive influx of fact and truth is gonna make Wobbie the Poopshoot cry.

Who is Wobbie the Poopshoot you ask? Don't worry, he'll find you , he is not about to take this kind of attack on his President go unanswered.

should be let this kind of attack go unanswered.

Re: "Its not wrong... its what presidents do... Hell Bush had already done this once before with most of the attorneys and no one gave a damn, before him Clinton fired every attorney, before him Bush's father fired attorneys.

This is what Presidents do... there was nothing wrong with it. What was wrong and exasperatingly stupid was trying to cover it up like they did something wrong."

It's not the firings. The president can fire them all or just fire some, or fire them all and then fire all their replacements. That's the president's right.

The question the Democrats are asking, and even some independents like me would like to know the answer to, is what was the reason for the firings?

Perhaps you may remember that back during Watergate Nixon had an enemies list, and the people who were on the list suffered such things as having their income taxes audited more frequently.

I'd guess that a president(or anyone for that matter) who suspects that someone is not paying their taxes has a right to suggest that they be audited, but if he does it to a group of people who are on a list of enemies, then Americans should have a right to know about it. Say that a Democrat were to ask his IRS staff to investigate Republicans and fire them if they did not do it - would that be fair?

In the case of the fired attorneys, the Democrats believe - without proof so far, but they are still trying to get that proof -- that the fired attorneys were fired because of their decisions to investigate and/or prosecute Republicans, or NOT to investigate and/or prosecute Democrats shortly before the 2006 election. The political reality is that even if someone is innocent, an announcement that the US attorney is investigating him or her for corruption or whatever can be very harmful when one is running for office.

Now it may well be that Republicans from now on will want to use the US attorneys to publicly investigate Democrats before all elections, and it may be that Democrats will want to publicly investigate Republicans.

But we independents think that US attorneys should have enough independence not to investigate anyone whom they do not think is truly guilty. And, if they do not investigate, and get fired because they did not investigate, then that firing says something about the presidential administration that did it. for example, Richard Nixon had every right to fire Archibald Cox, who had been appointed to investigate Nixon, but there was considerable outcry against the firing. Why? Nixon had every right to fire any one who is appointed by the president. Because of the REASON for Cox being fired.

In this case, we still do not know if there was a campaign to get the US attorneys to investigate Democrats or not investigate Republicans and that the fired Attorneys may have been fired because they did not do the first of these or did do the second of these. If so, the president still had the right to fire them, but we have a right to know about it.

Why? Well, there's a remote chance that we may want to change the law and make the US attorneys more like civil servants.

The Justice Department is supposed to be a law firm representing the American people, not the administration's political aims.

BRIWO:

Let Wob find me. Anyone who can try to excuse such ineptness and 'undecidership' should be a riot debating. Or, I'll just write one retort and ignore him as I would any obvious partisan who could possibly excuse the level of stupidity and arrogance Bush showed about killing Bin Laden and Zawahiri when we knew exactly where he was and had a team itching to take him out.

So much for Bush's Camp David 'Dead or Alive' bullshit.

I'm gonna keep posting the link to this article a few more times over the next few days. Any American, right or left, should be pissed as hell about it. If they aren't, they have no credibility whatsoever.

How Bush Let Osama and Zawahiri Get Away:

www.msnbc.msn.com

Americaunity: awesome! Keep up the fight.

You my want to check this out when you get a chance, some of us who met on this blog decided enough was enough and formed this network:

www.freeworldradionetwork.net

Democrats doing a great job of killing off the Hispanic vote thanks to their fight against Gonzales.

Roberto Gonzales is an American success story for Latinos and really for everyone. His grandparents may have been illegal immigrants as he said there was no documentation proving their citizenship. His parents had only a grade school education yet he grew up to graduate from Harvard Law School and become Attorney General for the United States! This is the highest position in history of the United States government for a Latino and he was placed there by a Republican. No Democrat had ever trusted a Latino with such a position.

So what do the Dems do? They shoot him down. There was no crime yet they hate George Bush so much that they were willing to jeopardize American national security to tie up Gonzales' office and make it difficult for him to do his job. Well done Dems. You will hear more harsh words about Gonzales from Democrats than Congressman William "I had $90,000 in my freezer and I under Federal indictment for bribery" Jefferson. They believe Ted "I killed Mary Jo Kopechne at Lake Chappaquiddick" Kennedy is a hero. And Gonzales is a bad guy? Like a said before, the Democrat symbol is not a jackass for nothing. Fits perfectly.

"Like a said before, the Democrat symbol is not a jackass for nothing. Fits perfectly."

And some Republicans (a minority) are represented well by the elephant for the giant size of their poop.

UTA-
I haven't heard Democrats making an issue of Gonzales' "race", but you seem to play it to the hilt.

Roberto Gonzales is an American success story for Latinos

Good, finally someone to off-set the shame brought onto the Hispanic-American population by the Bushlicker torture condoner and perverter of the Constitution he was sworn to uphold, Alberto Gonzales!

Oh, you were talkin' about, Alberto!

Carry on...

Chappaquidich? Jefferson?

Wow, now yer just grasping at straws, aintcha?

Be Well.

I haven't heard Democrats making an issue of Gonzales' "race", but you seem to play it to the hilt.

Of course you don't. Why would they call attention to it when it is an embarrassment. They laud themselves on being so much for the latino and carrying the latino vote.... why would they want to call attention to the fact that the very person they were trying to destroy was the highest positioned latino in American history? Of course they would want to be hush-hush about that and hope no one noticed.

UTA-
I'll illustrate, if you don't mind:

"Democrats doing a great job of killing off the Hispanic vote thanks to their fight against Gonzales."

Do you really think that the "Hispanic vote" will line up against Democrats just because an incompetent, lying subservient AG who acted, in his tenure as AG, as a puppet for the Republican party was called on it?

Seems you're the racist.

Bill Clinton had more women in cabinet positions that ever before him. First woman Secretary of State, first woman Attorney General, and the list goes on...

He even appointed a Republican as Secretary of Defense.

If you're not a NeoCon you don't stand a chance of being in the Bush Administration. If you happened to slip in, you got fired at the first inkling of disagreement with them.....like Paul O'Neill and Colin Powell.

I hope whoever is the next President won't cater hand and foot to only the lunatic fringe of their party like Bush did.

Gonzales may be Hispanic, but his memory wassn't suited for such a high position. "I don't recall', 'I don't recall', 'I don't remember', 'I don't recall',"I don't recall', 'I don't recall', 'I don't remember', 'I don't recall',"I don't recall', 'I don't recall', 'I don't remember', 'I don't recall',"I don't recall', 'I don't recall', 'I don't remember', 'I don't recall',"I don't recall', 'I don't recall', 'I don't remember', 'I don't recall',"I don't recall', 'I don't recall', 'I don't remember', 'I don't recall'

It sure was easier for everyone else on his staff to recall. This wasn't a Democrat witch hunt. Republicans right and left were calling for his resignation.

Mooman-
Do you think they should have made an issue of his "race", or do you think they should have overlooked his incompetence and lies due to his "race"?

I think it's just like that situation in Darfur:

CALLER: Hey, Rush. It's great to talk to you. I talked to you once before. I've been listening to you for a couple of years now, and I think I'm getting brighter, but there's a lot to be learned. I know I'm no expert in foreign affairs, but what really confuses me about the liberals is the hypocrisy when they talk about how we have no reason to be in Iraq and helping those people, but yet everybody wants us to go to Darfur. I mean, aren't we going to end up in a quagmire there? I mean, isn't it -- I don't understand. Can you enlighten me on this?

LIMBAUGH: Yeah. This is -- you're not going to believe this, but it's very simple. And the sooner you believe it, and the sooner you let this truth permeate the boundaries you have that tell you this is just simply not possible, the better you will understand Democrats in everything. You are right. They want to get us out of Iraq, but they can't wait to get us into Darfur.

CALLER: Right.

LIMBAUGH: There are two reasons. What color is the skin of the people in Darfur?

CALLER: Uh, yeah.

LIMBAUGH: It's black. And who do the Democrats really need to keep voting for them? If they lose a significant percentage of this voting bloc, they're in trouble.

CALLER: Yes. Yes. The black population.

LIMBAUGH: Right. So you go into Darfur and you go into South Africa, you get rid of the white government there. You put sanctions on them. You stand behind Nelson Mandela -- who was bankrolled by communists for a time, had the support of certain communist leaders. You go to Ethiopia. You do the same thing.

CALLER: It's just -- I can't believe it's really that simple.

LIMBAUGH: Well, see, I knew you couldn't believe it. But here's the -- here's one that's even going to be harder to believe and it is even more truthful. Could you tell me what vital national interest, [caller], is at stake in Darfur?

CALLER: Um, I don't know.

LIMBAUGH: Nothing. Zilch, zero, nada. Darfur is not attacking us. Darfur has not said they want to attack us. So they will -- same thing -- Clinton sent the U.S. military off to Bosnia. No U.S. national interest at stake. The liberals will use the military as a "meals on wheels" program. They'll send them out to help with tsunami victims. But you put the military -- you put the military in a position of defending U.S. national interest, and that's when Democrats and the liberals oppose it. And --

CALLER: Right. Terrorists have attacked us and our oil supply comes from, you know, Iraq and Iran and the Middle East, and yet that's not worth defending.

LIMBAUGH: Right. That's exactly right. You've got it. You've got it. Now you just have to believe your own instincts from here on out.

Do you really think that the "Hispanic vote" will line up against Democrats just because an incompetent, lying subservient AG who acted, in his tenure as AG, as a puppet for the Republican party was called on it?

Depends, first of all, on whether or not the latinos by-and-large agree with your assessment of Gonzalez.

Secondly the Dems are also hurt by the fact that it was a REPUBLICAN that put him in that position. Dems have had chances for years to get a latinos in to high positions like that. Considering the fact of how they like to trumpet that they are "simpatico" with the latinos it had to be a bit of a kick in the crotch from the Dems and comes across now as being little more than lip-service to get a vote.

Add to that the Dems fighting against latinos being appointed by Republicans to high positions... Judge Emilio Garza (Supreme Court nominee)... now Gonzalez. It just doesn't look good for the Dems.

I think it's clear who the racists are.

Mooman-
You think that latinos are so stupid that they overlook the individual and only see the ethnicity.

I got it.

Do you think they should have made an issue of his "race", or do you think they should have overlooked his incompetence and lies due to his "race"?

Wow... I just love those "do you still beat your wife" style questions.

Bill Richardson was actually the first Hispanic to hold a cabinet position - Secretary of Energy

Hmmmmm Who appointed him?

Duh

You think that latinos are so stupid that they overlook the individual and only see the ethnicity.

I got it.

Not at all... but I also believe they are very aware of, and have great pride, in their ethnicity. This is evidenced in many ways, not least of which is the very LARGE hispanic caucus and lobbying groups. Those groups ARE concerned with precisely those issues... and like it or not many in the hispanic voting block will listen to recommendations from those groups.

Mooman and UTA-
You two seem to be the ones claiming that latinos will have a backlash against Dems PURELY because Gonzales shares a skin tint with them.

Bill Richardson was actually the first Hispanic to hold a cabinet position - Secretary of Energy

Hmmmmm Who appointed him?

And what have they done lately?

Bush tried to get two into office. He succeeded with only one who is now gone. Reason for both? Democrats pulling out all the stops to block them or take them down.

Sorry, but it is always the last battle that you are remembered for. That just as true in politics as it is in war. The entertainment industry has it's own version of this saying. It is just reality. Dems screwed up with this one and it is going to come back to bite them.

"The Washington Post reports today that despite the Republican Party's rosy rhetoric about their outreach to Hispanic voters and the inroads they've made, Hispanics are in fact now overwhelmingly rejecting the failed leadership of President Bush and the Republican Congress. The results come less than a month after Republican National Committee Chairman Ken Mehlman told an audience of Latino elected officials from around the country that reaching out to Hispanics was "vitally important" and claimed that "a Republican Party that does not reach out to Hispanics cannot win ... and a Republican Party that does not reach out to Hispanics does not deserve to win." [Washington Post, 7/20/2006; Ken Mehlman remarks at NALEO, 6/22/2006]

The report details a new poll that shows that although Bush "had boosted the Republican share of the overall Hispanic vote to 40 percent in 2004, with almost all his gains coming among the Spanish-speaking voters," today Spanish speakers, roughly half of the Hispanic voting population, would choose the Democrat "59 percent to 23 percent -- far better than the 52 percent to 48 percent showing Kerry achieved among Spanish speakers in 2004." [Washington Post, 7/20/2006]

The poll, released yesterday, shows a full 61% of respondents saying the country is headed in the wrong direction, and President Bush with a 58% unfavorable rating. In a rebuke of Republican economic policies, an overwhelming 86% of respondents worried that the cost of living has increased, and ranked the economy only second to the war in Iraq when asked to identify the greatest issues facing the country. Democrats also outperformed Republicans in 17 of 20 issues, including "respects more my religious beliefs," "better use of my tax money," and "family values."

Mooman-
re: Bush tried to get two into office. He succeeded with only one who is now gone. Reason for both? Democrats pulling out all the stops to block them or take them down.

And there you go again, claiming group status over individual merit. I doubt latinos fall for your garbage, but then perhaps I have more respect for them than you.

You two seem to be the ones claiming that latinos will have a backlash against Dems PURELY because Gonzales shares a skin tint with them.

Wrong... try actually reading my posts up above. I gave SEVERAL reasons why that are going to contribute to the backlash.

I know it is hard to resist... but try not to distort my position and then argue against your distorted version. That is called a strawman. A ridiculous mistake to make when the evidence to contradict you was just posted a few posts back.

They're just jumping up and down in support of the GOP eh?

If Gonzales were a principled, truthful person he'd have done something to boost Hispanic support from it's minimal levels. But, he choose differently and blew a golden opportunity. Republicans were calling for his resignation right and left because he was so obviously untruthful.

This wasn't a partisan issue. It was a truthfulness issue. He lost all credibility amongst most all in Congress and the American public all on his own.

Not someone to look up to.

"Bush tried to get two into office. He succeeded with only one who is now gone. Reason for both? Democrats pulling out all the stops to block them or take them down."

I'm sure it was because they were latino?

(or was it something else?)

Again, you conflate race with merit ("Bush tried to get two into office")

Moomanfl

Check out the paragraphs I posted regarding polling amongst Hispanics.

Kind of tilted heavily towards Dems. Gonzales isn't going to help lift the anemic approval ratings they give Bush. If nothing else, he's going to hurt them.

Here it is again in case your 'up' scroll arrow isn't working:

The Washington Post reports today that despite the Republican Party's rosy rhetoric about their outreach to Hispanic voters and the inroads they've made, Hispanics are in fact now overwhelmingly rejecting the failed leadership of President Bush and the Republican Congress. The results come less than a month after Republican National Committee Chairman Ken Mehlman told an audience of Latino elected officials from around the country that reaching out to Hispanics was "vitally important" and claimed that "a Republican Party that does not reach out to Hispanics cannot win ... and a Republican Party that does not reach out to Hispanics does not deserve to win." [Washington Post, 7/20/2006; Ken Mehlman remarks at NALEO, 6/22/2006]

The report details a new poll that shows that although Bush "had boosted the Republican share of the overall Hispanic vote to 40 percent in 2004, with almost all his gains coming among the Spanish-speaking voters," today Spanish speakers, roughly half of the Hispanic voting population, would choose the Democrat "59 percent to 23 percent -- far better than the 52 percent to 48 percent showing Kerry achieved among Spanish speakers in 2004." [Washington Post, 7/20/2006]

The poll, released yesterday, shows a full 61% of respondents saying the country is headed in the wrong direction, and President Bush with a 58% unfavorable rating. In a rebuke of Republican economic policies, an overwhelming 86% of respondents worried that the cost of living has increased, and ranked the economy only second to the war in Iraq when asked to identify the greatest issues facing the country. Democrats also outperformed Republicans in 17 of 20 issues, including "respects more my religious beliefs," "better use of my tax money," and "family values."

Unfortunately, this is representative of the core of your political party:

LIMBAUGH: Yeah. This is -- you're not going to believe this, but it's very simple. And the sooner you believe it, and the sooner you let this truth permeate the boundaries you have that tell you this is just simply not possible, the better you will understand Democrats in everything. You are right. They want to get us out of Iraq, but they can't wait to get us into Darfur.

CALLER: Right.

LIMBAUGH: There are two reasons. What color is the skin of the people in Darfur?

CALLER: Uh, yeah.

LIMBAUGH: It's black. And who do the Democrats really need to keep voting for them? If they lose a significant percentage of this voting bloc, they're in trouble.

CALLER: Yes. Yes. The black population.

Must go. Enjoy the rest of the night.

"And what have they done lately? (referring to Richardson)"

Moomanfl

Well, let's see....

Oh, ya. Richardson is governor of New Mexico.

What? They don't tell you stuff like that where you get your 'news'?

Moomanfla is a Trool tool+troll=trool. You all aught to know that by now surely.

Larry

Larry

I'm pretty new here. But, it isn't taking long to figure out, as Captain Renault said in Casablanca, who the 'usual suspects' are in support of Bush and his cronies no matter how inept, incompetent, untruthful, or tragically wrong they've been.

Colin Powell tried for 2 hours to show W why we shouldn't invade Iraq. "There's the door Colin". Dick Cheney gave the same reasons (in 1994) youtube.com that came to pass why we shouldn't invade Iraq.

They let Bin Laden escape in spite of the CIA's live pleas to Bush when they had him in their sites and a box for his head..literally. www.msnbc.msn.com

They've raped the treasury, pissed off our allies, screwed up the 'War on Terror', and have accomplished nothing less than turning everything they've touched to shit. Yet, the 'usual suspects' here who obviously don't give a crap because they'd rather bash the opposition than call their own to the carpet for such an obviously long list of unneccessary messes - all of which were predicted would happen, yet did it anyway. One mistake you can let slide. Such a long list is unforgivable and should be untenable to any American of sound mind.

For sure, there is no love lost for Bush and his cronies around my house, but it's not because they're Republicans. I was willing to give them a chance when they were first elected. But they turned out to be arrogant, incompetent pricks who've created problems for America it could take decades to dig out from under. Anyone who still supports them wholeheartedly should be in the loony bin. Patriotic Americans of all stripes - right, middle, and left - should be seething in their skins. How some continue to support this bunch in the White House is beyond me.

I'll be so relieved in a little over a year when this bunch is clearing brush and giving speeches to sycophants rather than fucking up America worse than anyone thought possible.

They want to get us out of Iraq, but they can't wait to get us into Darfur.

Rush reduces the left's willingness to help the people out in Darfur to cynical pandering to the Black Dem base?

And people are stupid enuff to buy into this?

It's just -- I can't believe it's really that simple.

Exactly wot Spud was thinknig.

Be Well.

"Dems screwed up with this one and it is going to come back to bite them."

You insult the Latino population when you suppose that they can't understand that an incompetent liar shouldn't be Attorney General of the United States. That a man in favor of torture shouldn't be the highest official in our Justice Dept.
Don't underestimate the Latino community, they are not that stupid. They can understand clearly why it was important that Gonzalez be replaced.

so is it going to Lieberman that will replace him?:>)

www.guardian.co.uk

My prayer is for George W. Bush to nominate the most conservative FAR FAR RIGHT wing anti-abortion anti-illegal immigrant candidate imaginable. I hope the candidate makes Justice Scalia look like a flaming liberal.

I think Bush should take this time for a little pay back for the injustice done to Gonzales. Bush has NOTHING to lose and everything to gain by doing this.

Wow, great post UTA. What, exactly, does Bush have to gain by nominating someone who won't even get out of committee?

Or are you advocating that instead of making some moves that might help heal some of the wounds his party is suffering through, thus helping the future Republican Presidential nominee, he should just go out with a big F U?

Nice.

"I think Bush should take this time for a little pay back for the injustice done to Gonzales. Bush has NOTHING to lose and everything to gain by doing this."

Yer an idiot.

American Annuity, you are doing good deeds at researching linkd for the record. My q. What's your handle mean?

"American Annuity"

Looks to me like his handle reads 'American Unity'...

...but I could be wrong.

Hey Dumb Dems, Roberto Gonzales was the HIGHEST ranking position for a Hispanic person in the U.S. Government in the history of this nation!!!!! If the President were to pass away, the Attorney General is 7th line in succession to the presidency. As Secretary of Energy, Bill Richardson was 15th in the line of succession under Clinton.

The Dems has plenty of opportunity to place an Hispanic Person at the same or higher position and did NOT have apparent faith in Hispanics beyond lip service. Bush's nominations of Rice and Powell made those two the HIGHEST positions that blacks have EVER had in government in U.S. History. The Secretary of State is 4th in line of succession and the only black on the Supreme Court also put there by a Republican.

Dems are the true racists. They don't have any real faith in minorities to place them in the highest positions of power. It's all talk and I believe Hispanic voters will remember the Dem attack on Gonzales who many Hispanics admire greatly.

American Annuity, you are doing good deeds at researching linkd for the record. My q. What's your handle mean?

Posted by townncountry"

(I posted some of this on another thread. But, here's some of it to explain what my handle means):

When you have a president who could care less what the majority of Americans want, nothing changes. We need to unite to get the government to govern to the majority opinion.

A recent poll shows that the American public trusts Democrats more on every subject including fighting terrorism and taxes. The majority has spoken. This poll is from Rasmussen Reports, who have consistantly had the highest approval ratings for Bush - so they're hardly 'partisan' Democrats. The GOP are the ones out of sync with majority American public opinion:

www.rasmussenreports.com

I'm not a partisan, and Bush is no true conservative either. On a woman's right to choose for example, here's what Barry Goldwater, America's last real conservative, said:

""A lot of so-called conservatives today don't know what the word means," he told me with irritation in his voice. "They think I've turned liberal because I believe a woman has a right to an abortion. Hell, that's up to the pregnant woman, not up to the Pope or some do-gooders or the religious right." Such a statement was in the Goldwater mold: Say what you believe and let the chips fall where they may. Follow your conscience ahead of old partisan loyalties, even if you make some people mad.

findarticles.com

Bush remains entrenched in his NeoCon ideology in spite of what the American public wants. I'd be just as pissed at him if he were a Democrat and acted as he did. Never in my lifetime have I seen a president so out of sync with the American public in his refusal to yield to the majority wishes - as is supposed to be the case in a democracy.

American Unity
(Unity in our government - executive and legislative - being truly representative in advocating what the 'majority' of Americans want regardless of party affiliation. Unity in finding what makes us a 'United States' instead of Rush-like slanderous, divisive talk that's taken the 'United' out of 'United States'.).