Bush Appointees are Bailing Out!!!

Unfortunately, LE, you are now just another Rhino and your attacks on the GOP are unwarranted just because your new party lost the election, and rather badly. You have joined the Hollywood types who have promised never to be quiet in whatever ax they find to grind; they are John Cameron Mitchell, Richard Dreyfuss, Michael Moore, Paul Newman, P-Diddy, Tim Robbins, etc. To start the 2008 election so soon is unwarranted but that is what the CP and you have done.

 

Yeah, sure. If Kerry had won, the Bush zombies would just sit quietly and not complain, as he implemented the same policies that Bush is now pushing.

 

Not you too.

I thought that someone would put on the BB the facts surrounding the new AG2B's rulings on the Texas Supreme Court.

Did he make more than one ruling that is considered Pro-Abortion by the Religious Right?

He made one that I'm aware of that says a 17 year old girl does not automatically have her parents notified if she has an abortion in the State of Texas. Why did he do that? Because Texas Law states that a 17 year old girl has the right to consensual sex in Texas.

She doesn't have to ask her Parents to give her permission to have sex and they don't have to be notified if she goes in for an abortion. It is consistenty That Gonzales was after not a Pro-Abortion Ruling.

 

I wonder if they'll admit that this is not a good appointment, or try to spin the fact that Gonzales called the constitution a "living document". [/QB]</font>[/QUOTE]I saw this over there and found it ironic that Galatian cited WND. Was he one of hte ones that was making comments about it not being trustworthy whenever it proved him wrong?

 

Interesting. I was wondering about the facts of hte case. I can see now why Jonathan was hesitant to post them. It seems to show, if this is right, that there was more to this ruling than meets the eye. It is a shame that Jonathan didn't tell the whole story.

 

I was never "hesitant to post them"! This story is public information, if you were not able to find the "facts" that is not my fault. I told the whole story, he cast the tie breaking vote, as a Texas judge=, against a law requiring teenagers seeking abortions to notify their parents — without exception. Does the age of the child wanting to kill her baby matter?

Gonzales is a bad news on more issues than just abortion, he is also in favor of affirmative action, he played a strong role in weakening the Justice Department's criticism of racial preferences in the Michigan case. You want to know who basically OK'ed Abu Ghraib? Alberto Gonzales. Who said torture could be legal? Alberto Gonzales. Who drafted the sinister policy that allowed Guantanamo Bay to house prisoners without charge or legal representation? Alberto Gonzales. Who is going to be the next man interpreting law for the entire Justice Department? Alberto Gonzales.

I think its sad the way conservative Christians will do everything they can to justify a liberal government leader, simply because they are GOP.

[ November 16, 2004, 09:58 AM: Message edited by: JGrubbs ]

 

It's not part of the official cabinet, but according to the Washington Times, Ken Mehlman, campaign manager for Bush-Cheney '04, will be named head of the Republican National Committee.

It is widely rumored that Ken Mehlman is a homosexual, although Mr. Mehlman has refused to discuss his sexual orientation in public. Some moderates and liberals are already applauding the President for helping Mehlman become the leader of the GOP. </font>[/QUOTE]Will the conservative Christian's simply ignore President Bush calling for Mehlman to be the next chair of the RNC?

 

You're over the top. Just repeating what you've read without all of the facts. It's amazing how much news that you're regurgitating here is nothing more than OPINION PIECES.

 

Everything I have quoted is not "OPINION PIECES", but is based on the facts that have been in the news, and are available to the public. His votes as a judge in Texas are public information. What he did with the Justice Department and Michigan case of affirmative action are well documented.

Here is a 50 page document written by Gonzales that "justifies" Abu Ghraib, torture, and ignoring the US Constitution.

http://tinyurl.com/3errk

The facts are there, you can either ignore them or be on guard. Your wonderfull conservative Christian President is getting the wheels in motion to continue his destruction of our Constitutional Republic with his new cabinet.

&lt;edited to shorten link&gt;

[ November 16, 2004, 11:39 AM: Message edited by: C4K ]

 

His votes as a judge in Texas may be Public Information but I have not seen anyone on this board post any of this public information. Instead you have merely taken the word of someone who has said they they have examined these records and have stated their opinion about what they contain.

The same case can be made about the documents in your link. Two lawyers could read this document and arrive at two totally different positions.

The bottom line is We still don't know exactly where this man stands on these issues especially the issue of abortion.

&lt;long link removed&gt;

[ November 16, 2004, 11:39 AM: Message edited by: C4K ]

 

His votes as a judge in Texas may be Public Information but I have not seen anyone on this board post any of this public information. Instead you have merely taken the word of someone who has said they they have examined these records and have stated their opinion about what they contain.

The same case can be made about the documents in your link. Two lawyers could read this document and arrive at two totally different positions.

The bottom line is We still don't know exactly where this man stands on these issues especially the issue of abortion. </font>[/QUOTE]BTW, Who did the underlining in the document?

&lt;long link removed&gt;

[ November 16, 2004, 11:40 AM: Message edited by: C4K ]

 

I would assume that the Washington Post did the underlining in the document, but underlines and circles don't change what is in the document. I know, you don't care, you consider this to be equal to the documents from PNAC.

 

But I do care.

And I still care about the innuendo that Gonzales is Pro-Abortion.

I still haven't seen any evidence that conclusively proves this.

 

No, but the legal reasoning was interesting behind it. We live in a nation of laws. We detest judges that make law from the bench. They are to interpret the law. I disagree with that ruling, but I hardly think it makes him pro abortion. It would have been better for you to state the facts and let people decide. Of coures, they might not come to your opinion on it.

Probably not ... "basically ok'ed" is pretty broad and there is no evidence that anyone condoned it. The fact that detainees at certain camps may have had information that could have saved American lives is an important fact. How would you like to tell a parent that their son could have been saved, if only that prisoner would have talked. But because you did not force the issue, their son is dead. That is horrible military policy and bad politics. It is immoral to let an enemy continue to hide information that would save lives. I can't imagine that is even questioned. But perhaps it shows a great hypocrisy in your view of the sanctity of life.

In some cases it should be. The security of a nation is at stake. When people do not tell the truth, they should face the consequences for it. If you don't want to be tortured, then talk. It is that simple. I am not arguing we should endanger lives or prisoners, who treat them inhumanely. But lives are at stake.

They are not US citizens. They were illegal combatants. That is a matter of fact. There is nothing sinister about that. They wanted to fight a war. They could have laid down their weapons and walked away, but they didn't. So now they pay the price. Do not blame our government for their bad choices.

I don't see anyone here justifying a liberal leader. You are simply extremely biased. Bush is moderate to conservative. He is not a liberal. I don't support much of what Bush does, but as I have pointed out, you guys attack him no matter what he does simply because of your political bias. And taht is what is truly sad.

You did not tell the whole story on these matters. You told only certain parts that you thought would help you look better. I think that is weak.

 

Reports: Ridge, Armitage to step down

WASHINGTON (USATODAY.com) — Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge and Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage will step down, broadcast networks reported this morning.

Both CNN and MSNBC reported this morning that the two will step down, although a spokesman for the Department of Homeland Security told CNN he had no knowledge of any news that Ridge would leave. Ridge is vacationing in Hawaii.

Source: USA Today

 

No. They will hypocritically make excuses.

 

In 1972, after Nixon won re-election, he asked for the resignation of ALL his cabinet members. Of course, he retained many of them. My point is that it is NORMAL for some cabinet members to leave after one term. Most cabinet members are people of intelligence and wealth. Considering their capabilities, many serve at a tremendous sacrifice because they put in long hours and receive (relatively) little pay.

As for disagreements between Powell and others like Rumsfeld or Cheney, I am GLAD that Bush has strong voices in his administration who disagree. Before Bush makes a major decision like going to war in Iraq, he needs to hear some different and cogent points of view. It is to Powell's great credit that he stayed in the administration though his advice was often ignored and it is to Bush's great credit that he wanted to keep him.

As to Mehlman, do you know for a fact that he is homosexual? If not, is it fair to oppose him based upoon a rumor? Why would he ever want to become a Christian when he is experiencing malicious gossip by those who claim to be Christian?

 

Yeah, too bad it's too late.

Probably not. He should clear it up by stating his position. If he turns out to be one who would push homosexual activism, will you object, or make excuses?

 

Probably not??? So are you saying that, in some circumstances, it might be ethical ...and Christian to pass rumors about someone in order to defeat them? For Christians you guys sure are ruthless.