Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Attorney General Gonzales resigns

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Attorney General Gonzales resigns

    Attorney General Gonzales resigns.

    See,

    http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/08/...les/index.html

  • #2
    Someone once advised me, "When you find that you're riding a dead horse, it's a good idea to dismount."

    Gonzales should have resigned months ago. It's been obvious that he was a dead horse. Bush should have dismounted long before this.

    Comment


    • #3
      Could be the shrub is into beastial necrophila and just couldn't bring himself to part with his favorite 'toy'.

      Comment


      • #4
        And did you catch the shrub's wonderful eulogy? OMG talk about disconnected from reality!
        I did enjoy Sen. Leahy's comments, essentially: "it ain't over folks"

        b.l.

        Comment


        • #5
          Listen:

          Gone-zales!

          Comment


          • #6
            Free at last, free at last, good God almighty we're fre at last.

            Well, maybe? We'll see, it is a step in the right direction. If we cannot believe that the highest law officer in the land believes in the rights enumerated in the constitution and the bill of rights then we no longer need his services.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Naturist Mark:
              Listen:

              Gone-zales!

              Comment


              • #8
                I have been on Cloud Nine ever since I heard about this.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by NudistMetalHead:
                  I have been on Cloud Nine ever since I heard about this.
                  I was until I heard a scenario in which Bush & Co. select Lieberman for the post of Attny Gen. Once he takes the position the 'publican gov of Ct gets to appoint a replacement for Lieberman. This of course upsets the majority in the senate.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by NudeTopher (christopher):
                    quote:
                    Originally posted by NudistMetalHead:
                    I have been on Cloud Nine ever since I heard about this.
                    I was until I heard a scenario in which Bush & Co. select Lieberman for the post of Attny Gen. Once he takes the position the 'publican gov of Ct gets to appoint a replacement for Lieberman. This of course upsets the majority in the senate.


                    mostly on paper. I mean the dude's owned by Tel Aviv, and is more right wing than several Republican's We can't count on him for a damned thing as it is.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by NudeTopher (christopher):
                      quote:
                      Originally posted by NudistMetalHead:
                      I have been on Cloud Nine ever since I heard about this.
                      I was until I heard a scenario in which Bush & Co. select Lieberman for the post of Attny Gen. Once he takes the position the 'publican gov of Ct gets to appoint a replacement for Lieberman. This of course upsets the majority in the senate.
                      It wouldn't be all that bad ... Lieberman is a lousy Democrat, but as a Republican he isn't necessarily that bad, he might actually be a good choice to clean up the stink at Justice. As for his replacement ... also not so bad, instead of an 'independent Democrat' who votes with the Republicans on every important vote, we would have a Connecticut Republican who would probably vote with the Republicans, but who might (as many Connecticut Republicans do) vote with the Democrats on a few important issues.

                      When Jim Jeffords left the Republican party in 2001 to become an independent who caucused with the Democrats the Senate majority leadership switched from the Republicans to the Democrats. This was because at the beginning of the Congressional session the Senate was split exactly 50-50, and in organizing the Senate the Vice President does not have a vote (If he did, the leadership would have been decided by Al Gore, since the Congressional term and its organizing period begin BEFORE the inauguration of the new President and Vice President). In this case the two leaders - Daschel and Lott, agreed to split committee membership evenly but put Republicans in the Chairmanship - provided that the Chairmanships would change if intervening events put the other party in the majority - as it did. That agreement was dropped in the next two Senate classes when the Republicans took the majority, so they would remain in charge even if a dozen Rebublican Senators switched parties. And of course Reid and McConnell made no such agreement for the current session. So even if Lieberman is replaced with a Republican, Harry Reid remains the 'majority' leader, and the Democrats retain their committee chairmanships until January 2009.

                      So - Democrats remain in charge of the Senate, and the new Republican won't vote any worse than Lieberman already does. What's the worry? Hey, as far as I'm concerned the Republicans can have Ben Nelson too.

                      -Mark

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        T'aint over yet, the last shoe is still to drop...

                        Josh Bolten & Harriet Miers: "Contempt of Congress" and Rove may not be far behind!

                        Your customizable and curated collection of the best in trusted news plus coverage of sports, entertainment, money, weather, travel, health and lifestyle, combined with Outlook/Hotmail, Facebook, Twitter, Bing, Skype and more.

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X