When was the last time a McDonald's employee lost billions of dollars, killed tens of thousands of people and increased terrorism globally? Did he get to keep his job afterwards?

__________________
If a neocon whines about big government wealth redistribution, just ask him what he thinks about the portion of that big government that sends aid to Israel.

This whole thing about these attorneys is just stupid. The only reason it is getting all of this attention is to attempt to make the Bush Administration look bad. The people pimping the resignation of Gonzales don't give two shits about these attorneys losing their jobs; they just want to take down George or hurt him as badly as they can between now and his last day in office.

Personally, I don't care for Gonzales. I don't know if he has done anything wrong or not and I, like most Americans, don't give a crap. There are more important things going on that need attention than this stupid Romper Room charade.

__________________
"Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."

President George W. Bush, 8-5-2004

Carolina Politics Online

THIS IS REAL HOPE AND CHANGE!

and so what? I suppose clinton replace his 93 with republicans? please......this is ridiculous...come on now how low can they get....

it is all just hash as matt said.....lets move on for god sakes...this is soooo petty....

and please remeber, there will be another dem. president....you hamstring Bush with this crap, you hamstring them...

__________________
No individual can plan his own existence in their view.

So the state planners must arrogate to themselves the right to manipulate any sector of the economic system if the good of “society” or the “general welfare” is paramount.

Ipso- if the rights of the individual get in the way, the rights of the individual must be sublimated.

The Road to Serfdom
FA Hayek (interpretation)


Mortgage Backed Security survivor

True but the point is, pragmatically, there is no difference…libby lied…clinton lied…….whatever the subject matter….the result should have been the same Clinton in the end lost his bar card in Arkansas and settled out of court with jones etc….Libby might go to prison…..this may appear fair…

__________________
No individual can plan his own existence in their view.

So the state planners must arrogate to themselves the right to manipulate any sector of the economic system if the good of “society” or the “general welfare” is paramount.

Ipso- if the rights of the individual get in the way, the rights of the individual must be sublimated.

The Road to Serfdom
FA Hayek (interpretation)


Mortgage Backed Security survivor

I like how you compare president Bush to the ultra leftist Chavez. That is funny Sam.

There are plenty of legitimate reasons to be against our current president. The problem is that leftist loonies are so blinded by their partisanship that they can't see them and instead go out on a limb to get worked up over non-issues. Furthermore it is not unconstitutional for the president to fire anyine in his administration.

President Clinton cleaned house when he was elected not much outcry there.

CHEERS!

Good thing Bush didn't lie about Iraq under oath, but only to 300 million Americans.

__________________
If a neocon whines about big government wealth redistribution, just ask him what he thinks about the portion of that big government that sends aid to Israel.

There probably won't be any legal ramifications from "Attorneygate", but there will be political ramifications. The whole matter will be aired in public hearings, with testimony under oath and compelled by subpoena, and it will make Bush and the Republican party look like petty thugs, unworthy to hold public office.
This will cost the GOP votes in 2008.

That's the game as it is supposed to be played.

I applaud these hearings, because when a political party tries to pervert the justice system into an arm of their campaign organization it is the legitimate concern of every voter.

Compare this to the 400 hours of testimony the Republican Congress heard on how the Clinton White House purchased office supplies, and ask yourself, which issue has more claim to legitimacy............

__________________
“ The subjects of every state ought to contribute towards the support of the government, as nearly as possible, in proportion to their respective abilities; that is, in proportion to the revenue which they respectively enjoy under the protection of the state.”

Adam Smith , The Wealth of Nations 1776

"We have always known that heedless self-interest was bad morals; we know now that it is bad economics"
FDR's second Inaugural Address

I see. So perverting the firing process = bad.

Holding hearings to pervert the hearing process for political gain = good.

Hypocrite = Goober.

Matt

__________________
De duobus malis, minus est semper eligendum

Actually you've got it wrong. It is the way the Bush admin handled this that has got Congress calling for blood. It is simply another example of an administration so arrogant that it thinks it can do pretty much whatever it wants and not have to answer any questions. In the past they were right, but someone screwed up and forgot to factor in the fact that they do not control Congress anymore.

Of course Dems are going to try and hurt him, just as the Repubs wanted to hurt Clinton after making them look bad in the 90's. That is politics. The problem here is that the admin seems to have bent over backwards to make it easy for the Dems to accomplish that task. Frankly I am not blaming the Dems for being political in an era when everyone is so partisan it is sickening. I blame the Repubs for making it easy for them.

__________________

The universe grows smaller every day and the threat of aggression by any group anywhere can no longer be tolerated. There must be security for all or no one is secure... - Klaatu

not surpriseing since it came from the same guy who said he wanted this:

don't want impeachment, I want 65 Democratic Senators, and 300 Democratic Representatives, and Democrat in the White House in 2008, and 42 Democratic State Houses gerrymandering the fuck out of the political map in 2011.

I want "The Republican Party" to be the answer to a trivia question in 2020.

And it looks like I am getting what I want, I just hope they drag out the hearings a little and save the really juicy stuff for October 2008.

Having said that, you have to remember that Gonzales is Attorney General. It's actually Attorneys General, which makes him the most important law official in the land. Yes, he can oversee the replacement of lawyers, which is what it was, not a firing. But it was the underhanded and overtly political nature of their replacing that needs to be criticized. Most every president replaces the other guy's federal lawyers at the beginning of his term, but never in the beginning of the lawyers second term. And doing it just before the Congress is going to sunset that ridiculous clause that allows the president to replace lawyers without the senate's backing represents a blatant abuse of power.

I just wish Americans weren't so polarized and could see the move for what it is. It doesn't matter whose in charge, this was an abuse of power. It makes Gonzales lose credibility on any future decision he might make, because it will seem political in nature, not moral.

When I was a kid I had a friend who used to find the cheat codes for every video game he used to play. I used to tell him all the time "you are cheating." He would respond with "It isn't cheating if they let you do it." You know what maybe what was done was sneaky and underhanded but it wasn't illegal and therefore isn't an "abuse of power" in the strictest sense of the word. The proper response by congress would be to fix the problem legislatively rather then holding useless hearings which are solely designed to make the President look bad. Bottom line. No law was broken. If congress doesn't like what the President did then attempt to change the law. Otherwise they should all just STFU.

That would be all well and good "OF" ot were possible, but it's not. Passing such a Bill would just get it Vetoed. (Unless enough Republicans get sufficiently fed up)

That would be all well and good "IF" it were possible, but it's not. Passing such a Bill would just get it Vetoed. (Unless enough Republicans get sufficiently fed up) There are only two ways out of this whole stand-off.

1. Impeach him, or

2. Blackmail him by passing absolutely nothing until he agrees to sign the necessary bills to bring an end to these outrages.