Will Gonzales get fired?

[Preechr]

No, he won't. I can't believe you are getting this worked up over this. He shouldn't have apologized as far as that goes, really... Kevin already pointed out what I figured you must already have known, though I'm starting to wonder if maybe you just blacked the Clinton years out altogether... Don't you remember Janet Reno firing ALL the US attorneys? I'm not saying that's worse so this is forgivable, just that it's what they can and do do. Yes, it's political in nature. It always is. It's part of a US attorney's job. It's a political position, and if you don't pull your political weight for the political people that politically installed you, you get politically fired and politically replaced.

Oh, wait... maybe it's me that's senile... I forgot the Max Template: (Bush Staffer) + Something... ANYTHING! = He/She should most definitely resign... I mean, that's just the right thing to do in one of these Something... ANYTHING! situations, right? It's a valid strategy at least. I suppose I have to give you points for being consistent. If the Bush administration was fully following your personell advice, everybody from Cheney to Barney would have had to quit over Something... ANYTHING! by now. They would surely have had to have hired and subsequently fired every single Republican in the country by now, and would have had to start resorting to hiring Democrats to keep the government running. You crafty devil! I see what you're doing!

[sspadowsky]

Might I point out the fundamental difference between this and the "b-b-b-b-but.... but Clinton!" argument?

Under Clinton, any Federal Prosecutor appointed to replace those fired still had to go through Senate confirmation. Now (Thanks, PATRIOT ACT!), El Presidente can pick people without all that pesky "checks and balances" nonsense.

Sorry to interrupt. Please continue with the "everything is super" rhetoric.

Oh, and Preech, there's a LOT of deplorable shit over which Bush and Co. (AND OTHER ADMINISTRATIONS) should have resigned and haven't, but I guess that's one of those benefits of not having a conscience.

[Preechr]

Honestly, I am really not arguing that. To me, the easiest method for completely writing off a person on moral grounds is to have him or her win an election. If I actually thought "everything is super" I probably wouldn't be posting as much when this stuff comes up. I think things are inadvertently going to work out for the best, despite the best misguided efforts of the leaders involved. George W Bush's positions on terrorism and globalization might come from the wrong place, but the big efforts being made toward his admittedly unthoughtful ends are serving "my" ultimate goals, so I can live with it.

The people I read are also talking to John Kerry and all that jazz, and those folks also seem to be on board as best they can... BUT only in as much as they or any other politician can come to grips with the reality of the situation.

[mburbank]

Preech doesn't think all things are super. BUT if I get him correctly, (tell me if I don't) he thinks all bad behavior is equal bad behavior, and I strongly disagree.

Dude. Asked to testify before congress, Gonzales said 'Mistakes were made'. Hmmmm. What should anybody in politics know about that line? Why is it so naggingly familiar? Where have I- OH THAT'S RIGHT, IT'S THE EXACT CHOICE OF WORDS NIXON USED IN REFERENCE TO WATERGATE that people have made fun of him over for decades! It falls in the same category as "If the Pressident does it then it's not illegal" and "I was only following orders".

If the AG doesn't know not to phrase his blundering and or malfeasance any other way, he shouldn't have a drivers liscence, let alone be top cop.

Plus, what Sspad said. t comes back to checks and balances ovber and over and over. Bush co don't like 'em, because as bad as previous dogs have smelled, these dogs smell worse.

[Preechr]

I know I already said this, but it was buried in with a bunch of other words, so maybe you missed... I'M NOT SYAING THAT'S WORSE SO THIS IS FORGIVEABLE. So, No, I don't think all bad behavior is equal. I wasn't comparing the two types of behavior. I was providing a very good example to highlight how this is not bad nor abnormal behavior.

[sspadowsky]

I was providing a very good example to highlight how this is not bad nor abnormal behavior.

No words in the English language can explain how vehemently I disagree with this. CHECKS AND BALANCES CHECKS AND BALANCES CHECKS AND GODDAMN MOTHERFUCKING BALANCES I WILL SAY IT OVER AND OVER until people start realizing how truly dangerous this behavior has become.

You show me another administration that has so consistently so thoroughly trodden on and circumvented the Constitution, and I will shut up.

Until then.....

CHECKS AND BALANCES CHECKS AND BALANCES...... etc.....

[mburbank]

From Slate:

The White House and DoJ are now under fire because, in disrespecting the post of U.S. attorney, they appeared to interfere with the independence of that office in a way that's unprecedented. In the previous quarter-century, according to the Congressional Research Service, no more than five and perhaps only two U.S. attorneys, out of 486 appointed by a president and confirmed by the Senate, have been similarly forced out—in the middle of a presidential term for reasons not related to misconduct. "It would be unprecedented for the Department of Justice or the president to ask for the resignations of United States attorneys during an administration, except in rare instances of misconduct or for other significant cause," White said when she testified in February about the Bush firings before much was known about them. Previous midterm removals include those of a Reagan U.S. attorney fired and convicted for leaking confidential information and a Clinton appointee who resigned under pressure after he lost a major drug case and allegedly went to an adult club and bit a topless dancer on the arm. This time, the stories are quite different.