Wednesday, March 21, 2007

About the Attorney General's Firings and Bush Response; Democrats Much Ado about Nothing

If you were a CEO, would you want all your inter-office memos and emails published? I think not. You want to be able to fire somebody and say so because you think he's an idiot --or inept--or because you want to put someone else in there --which is the prerogative of the president and the AG. Didn't someone say that Janet Reno fired all 93 attorneys? What's the Dems' problems with firing 8?

If the problem is that the AG unwisely said they were fired for performance lack, let's remember TRAVELGATE --when Hillary fired career employees at the White House travel office (not political appointees) on trumped-up charges of ineptitude --so she could hire friends from Arkansas. And she got away with that!

Democrats in congress should bive Bush the same breaks they'd give their own party!
This is what we can expect from the dems all the way to the election--constant nit-picking and media mongering to imply great evil in high places --which is really much ado about nothing.


steve said...

Comrade Barb:

Why? Because the administration fired prosecutors who were in the process of bringing further indictments to corrupt GOP officials tied to Abrimoff and Cunningham. The GOP wanted the prosecutors in certain competitive districts to investigate Democrats prior to the November elections in order to affect the outcome of the election. The firings were purely political, which undermines our entire justice system.

Do you want our justice system with a side of politics? Or do you want a justice system that is independent and impartial and serves the interest of the people, not a political party?

What? You do? Ok, I thought this was the United States, not Stalinist Russia.

Barb said...

Why did Janet Reno get rid of the whole department? because they were investigating white water and other Cllinton corruption --his campaign financing was riddled with illegalities, including the Indonesian funding, the Buddhist temple fund raising, etc. --there are ongoing investigations brought by Judicial Watch regarding unreported funds and foreign funds for Clinton campaigns. Consider it odd that Vince Foster and another guy, Af. American, can't think of his name --died in suspicious tragedies just before they would have to testify to Clinton campaign issues. The southeastern legal foundation also is still trying to see Clintons brought to justice. I predict that the Clintons have skeletons in their financial closets (and others) that will come to light in 08 by her opponents in both parties.

Abramhoff and Cunningham weren't doing the president's work --enrichening themselves, weren't they? --where Clinton was responsible for all his own scandals.

I say they surely should pin the tails on the illegal donkeys before elections --and the justice department should do it. They do it to republicans when THEIR guys are in.

Most of the leading democrats, sadly, are not tempered by any commitment to religious values in what they do.

Why is that democrat still in office who had bribe cash in his freezer?? A republican who did something so blatant would be taken out by his own party.

Barb said...

ps --not only would the republicans remove such a guy as Jeffers for the bribes stashed in his freezer--was that his name? -the republican home district would not want him to run if he were their congressman; they would vote for an alternate candidate put up by the GOP. Democrats, however, let jeffers run and win for fear of losing the seat if they didn't.

Republican Tom Foolery is example --he had to step down --and I don't know whether we were able to get a republican successor elected in his place or not --but we took that risk in the election-because we couldn't be a family values party and have a pederast (or any adult) congressman seducing our pages by email or otherwise.

However, I bet if we had discovered his doings first, the dems would've said republicans were unmerciful in outing a gay guy. The pages (or democrats?) exposed him, I believe. Note that interns of age are another story --fair game for democratic presidents twice their age to do under the desk.

I tell you, one party (and its voters) is clearly more ethical than the other --even when scandals erupt in GOP, we try to clean it up --not ignore it to keep the guy in office. Even in Watergate, REPUBLICANS made Nixon step down to avoid damage of impeachment to the country --which damage the democrats didn't care about in Clinton's scandal, lying, maligning his accusers, etc.

Republicans foolishly have turned against their own far-sighted president in this Iraq issue. it's republicans who made Newt resign over his affair during Clinton Lewinsky scandal. Newt went; Clinton stayed and stayed and stayed (via his wife) even though his term ended the year of the impeachment. Had Dems made Bill step down and let Gore take over, he probably would've won the next election and would've been pres. during 9/11.

that's why I don't think most of the leading republicans now will end up being the candidate. We don't want to defend immoral conduct to the nation, as democrats are willing to do for their own. I predict Fred Thompson, Condi Rice who so far isn't running, or Brownback have the best chance. Republicans can't win without their evangelical base--not that they would vote democrat --but they won't get motivated to vote for an oft-married man who is ALSO soft on abortion and the gay issues. Guliani's story of adultery with his assistant and kicking the ex out of the mayor's mansion will haunt the republicans. he should quit now. They aren't even going to LIKE his wife a little bit as a successor to Laura Bush.

It's not that others are perfect, but there ARE men of good character (like Bush and Carter and the senior Bush) and we should be able to find one.

the Bible says if a man can't be trusted with small things (like a marriage?) he ought not be trusted with greater--like a nation. Yes, Reagan was divorced, but I never heard there was adultery involved. He seemed to get it right the second time around --and had the adoration of his Christian son of his first marriage, Michael --who says his father led him to faith in Christ (to his step family's annoyance, I observed.)

Reagan with Peggy Noonan as his writer was an inspirational president. Bush's downfall is his lack of eloquence. however, he has made some excellent speeches with his writers --and defended his position on Iraq beautifully and convincingly --but Dem voters probably didn't even listen--and Dem voters want to win so badly to protect their liberal social views, they will do anything to get elected.

Barb said...

correction --Foster died before having to testify re: white water, rose law firm, etc., I think. he WAS very depressed. There were so many gun to the head deaths surrounding Clintons --deaths of people having to do with their illegalities going way back to ARkansas.

He WAS the president of sleaze. But Dems didn't care about any of that.