Attorney General resigns

Apparently the President needed to pick someone with a little more fortitude.

 

We owe him a great debt of gratitude for working so hard to protect our nation.

At the same time, he made a big mistake pertaining to the fired attorneys.

He should have taken a more forceful stand indicating that the Administration had the right to fire any and all U.S. Attorneys for any reason or for no reason. No explanations needed and none given.

And stuck to it.

 

I am glad to see Gonzales resign. The federal AG needs to put the protection of the constitutional rights of Americans front and center.

 

Just another one of Bush's allies fallen to the wayside... There appears to be alot of that lately.

Things always have a way of working themselves out. People can only duck and dodge for so long.

Good riddance!
Jamie

 

The expression "rats jumping ship" comes to mind

 

I wouldn't place too much stock in this fact; after all how many of Jesus' "friends" hung around after His arrest?

Now all youse guys with a bad case of BDS, don't get your panties in a wad.
All I'm saying is that the desertion is a non-issue; not saying that Pres. Bush is "equal" to Jesus.

Conversely, look how many of WJC's stoogie hung on (still?), so abandonment is NOT a very good guage!

 

The Bush Administration is about the last thing I would compare to Jesus.

 

Yet another rat flees the sinking ship.

 

Agreed, and my post should stop there, but:

Democrats like Charles Schumer, Harry Reid, hate no one so much as an uppity minority who doesn't tow their party's line. It really doesn't matter to them what they stand for, but that they strayed from the Democrat party that thinks it owns them.

Gonzales' stand for a "living" constitution, is what irked me. He thinks the Constitution is whatever the SCOTUS says it is.

 

When Slick assumed office in '93' he fired all 93 US attorneys, and no one said a word. It was his right to appoint his own judges, but somehow it's not GWB's right.

 

I assume you meant prosecutors, not judges.

President Clinton replaced U.S. attorneys at the start of his presidency. President Bush did so during the course of his administration and subjected the process to the questioning of his motives for doing so.

 

He lost my support with his "I don't recall" answers. I HATE it when leaders invoke that phrase.

 

I hope someone is appointed who can provide steady leadership for this department for the rest of the term without a big fight.

 

Actually Rush Limbaugh kept pretty close tabs on the Clintons and has pretty much made his opinions known about even the smallest details of the Clintons.

 

I think Bush should nominate Chuck Schumer or Patrick Leahy. They both demonstrated a grand grasp of how the department should be run and could bring credibility back to it very quickly.

I would love to see Bush do it simply for the fireworks

 

As Bush made his first Atty. General from an incumbent senator who lost his seat to a dead man, maybe he can continue to lift the downtrodden by nominating Scooter as the new A.G.

 

Proves my point yesterday exactly.

 

I didn't follow your point yesterday. You offered some sort of apology that I wasn't sure what it was about. Perhaps I am just dense because I am on Vicodin. Why not just explain your point?

My point here was one of slight sarcasm as well as pointing out that the Dems in the Judiciary aren't about solving the problem but about making political hay out of it.

If Schumer thinks the Justice Department is in such shambles, could he not clean it up? And shouldn't he be willing to unless he just wants to make the political point?

I think the Dems on the Judiciary are a bunch of stuffed shirts looking to play politics with the Justice department. I haven't seen much of the comments of the Republicans except for Specter. I don't konw what any of the other Republicans have said really. I know what the Dems have said because I watched them.

 

While I never thought of either party as pure, there was a time, at least from a human perspective, that one could count on the Republicans to at least have an appearance of honesty, integrity, and good government. I thought this through Nixon, Ford, Reagan, and Bush 1. Even though I could not vote then, Eisenhower was always someone to be admired. Even the actions of Nixon did not do much to change my mind about the basic fundamentals of the Republican party.

It is very difficult to watch, over the last seven years or so, even after voting twice for the same person in 2000 and 2004, to see the systematic destruction of the Republican party down so far that there is no discernable difference between them and the Democrats.

Your point is correct in the fact that people like Schumer, Kennedy, and Levin have no business criticizing how the Justice Department was run, because they could not do any better. The tragedy is that who is leaving is not any better.

There was a time when I am sure we would have agreed on most issues of the day, and probably still do in a sense. Where we depart is the belief that it is still better to support Republicans than Democrats. My idea is that we need new choices.

Hope you get to feeling better.