Karl Rove is certainly keeping things interesting for the Bush Administration.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17637053/site/newsweek/

When Clinton took office, he fired all of the US attorneys, including one investigating a friend of Bill

And your proof is where...?

and Clinton was president and fully accountable for that decision. Why is the Bush Administration ducking all accountability in the mess and, moreover, it's yet another example of Karl Rove's fingerprints being all over yet another investigation into the improprieties of the Bush presidency.

Usually, when a president first takes office, it's nothing personal, he just axes ALL the attorneys and replaces them with his own guys. Sorta like a radio station airstaff getting blown out when it flips formats. Reagan did it, Bush I did it, Clinton did it.

Bush didn't do that. As per usual, his administration has managed to take something routine and pretty scrutiny-free and make it a sour-smelling, corrupt clusterfuck.

And, the Bush administration lied about it and tried to coverup the lies.

I smell indictments in the air...

It's routine for an incoming president to fire all the existing US attorneys and replace them with his own. Clinton did this in 1993, just as Bush did in 2001. That's ***IRRELEVANT***.

What's relevant is that these attorneys were fired long after Bush assumed office, for political purposes. The Bush administration took advantage of a loophole inserted into the Patriot Act that allowed them to replace attorneys without seeking approval from Congress, whereas Bush's original choices for US attorneys had to be approved by Congress.

It seems that indeed the issue is lying about it and covering it up. That's why several prominent Republicans have called for AG Gonzales to resign. Now that we have a Congress with a backbone and subpeona power, we're definitely going to be hearing more about this.

Andrew

Bush apparently also lied about conducting a full scale internal investigation of the outing of Valerie Plame. Turns out, even though Bush promised an investigation, the investigation never happened.

Firing all and starting fresh like Reagan and Clinton did immediately and all other presidents do over a couple of months after they take over, uncluding Bush Jr., is a far cry from firing only those who are not truly partisan after you select them.

How many kids did janet reno get killed, and she wasnt fired.

US attorneys serve at the pleasure of the President, and these wernt doing their job, so they were fired.

If the president was going to fire some for political reasons, it would have been Fitzpatrick.

Does somebody pay you to post that stuff?

(serious)

No, but they should, President should hire me, I could get his approval rating back up in a hurry.

With the 20-03 percent of us diehards, sure. You go for it. He could use the help.

You do realize the majority of your material, posted here, lies outside the mainstream, right?

Q: Does somebody pay you to post that stuff?

A: Yes, it's Herb and that other guy who used to live here (WW).

With Nwokie's thought process I'm thinkin' that DUHbya's approval rate would be around 8-10%....

pdradio.com is dominated by liberals with the same mindset. It's refreshing to read the postings by the few token conservatives at this website.

Unfortunately the few token conservatives are denigrated and marginalized by the liberal posters. So much open-mindedness and tolerance.

"pdradio.com is dominated by liberals with the same mindset. It's refreshing to read the postings by the few token conservatives at this website."

The point Nwokie evades is that the white house denied, mislead, and has a now long history of no accountability.
Address the issue of the post, don't try and hijack the thread with "Clinton blah blah blah."

"Unfortunately the few token conservatives are denigrated and marginalized by the liberal posters. So much open-mindedness and tolerance."

Because they can't ('cause there isn't) intelligently reply to the shortcomings of the administration they put into office which has proven time and time again that they don't have a f*#$ing clue about running the country, rather all they care about is their party and personal wealth.

"I could get his approval rating back up in a hurry."

"With Nwokie's thought process I'm thinkin' that DUHbya's approval rate would be around 8-10%"

OMG! Trix thinks NW_Okie could more than triple his approval rating! That's pretty optimistic of you, Trix! (LOL)

All we ask is for solid support for your views.

Not being able to do that, after such a long and consistant string of failures, really makes a great case for some serious reconsideration, does it not?

It's not as hard as you think. The key is to not let others define your worth and your values. If you can manage this, you will then be on the first of many steps toward being who you are, not what others think you should be.

THIS IS A REALLY BIG DEAL.

The empowerment that comes with that, simply cannot be matched!

The beauty of it lies in the fact that your ideology no longer defines who you are, how you are supposed to think, and what your worth is. You do these things instead!

Trust me, it's an effort that may be scary, tough, etc... but it is totally worth it.

Again, if you cannot support these things you say you believe, you've really gotta ask yourself if they are what you believe, or are what others believe. And worse, why you choose to identify with those who cannot support what they say you should be accepting!

THIS TOO IS A REALLY BIG DEAL.

Believe in personal responsibility? I do, and guess what? I can support every last thing I advocate here, nearly every action I take and the judgements I make in life.

At the end of the day, I really don't feel bad about much. Why? Because I know it's defensible, it's who I am, and I'm perfectly ok with that.

I hear this whining all the time. Token conservatives, flaming liberals, same mindset, etc...

It's bull --all of it.

The views expressed here, vary widely. Many contributors here do not self-identify as being liberal, etc...

This whole same mindset thing boils down to this:

IT SEEMS LIKE THE SAME MINDSET BECAUSE IT DIFFERS FROM YOUR OWN AND YOU'VE NO REAL SUCCESS PARROTING THE DOGMA HERE.

Why?

Because a majority of the contributors here have made the leap I'm posting about right now.

Join them. ---Please join them for our mutual benefit.

Support your stuff people. Do it without labels, and you cannot go wrong.

It really is just that simple.

Missing kskd, there you go again. Your posts are long but they don't say much.

Please be brief and coherent.

Ok.

Support it, or stuff it. When that burden is met, the discussion goes just fine. When it isn't, the regular cry babies start crying. Again, does that not make a pretty solid case for some reconsideration, or at the very least some acceptance?

To blame it on some group mindset, or other equally goofy construct is simply lame. If, what you present here is just and true, supporting it is a no-brainer right? So, where is it then? Been here for years, watching the same dodges, BS and general grumbling about this, that and basically anything but reality.

Simpler?

Grow up.

Your response as usual is a dodge.

My previous post was making the case for civil discourse. Here is example: "With Nwokie's thought process I'm thinkin' that DUHbya's approval rate would be around 8-10%"

Is that discourse acceptable to you? You won’t answer it. Instead you personally attact me, which is dodge. Is that what a grownup does?

I suggest you work on your own-self growth.

The Topic of this post is Attorney Firings. Maybe you should you should write about it, instead about me.

Actually, I think that is perfectly acceptable!!

I happen to agree as well.

Let me get this clear, DD. You write a post that says

Missing kskd, there you go again. Your posts are long but they don't say much.

Please be brief and coherent.



And then you whine

The Topic of this post is Attorney Firings. Maybe you should you should write about it, instead about me.

Maybe YOU should write about the Attorney Firings and not about Missing_kskd? And try to stop being a hypocrite?

Andrew

LOL!!!

Listen DD. You do this on a regular basis. It's the same cycle, over and over again, once every few months. When will that get tiresome?

For what it's worth, my post was directed to more than just you. Anybody who identifies with your whining here, is a valid target for those words. And I mean every word of it too.

It's not a personal attack, but more of an effort to encourage others to go do some solid thinking and present that to us here, instead of the whining and labels. If you do this, we all benefit! It's a good thing!

As for the grow up bit, sorry but it's appropriate. Think about kids. Do we let them whine for no reason? I know I don't. Grown people are no different. It all depends on where we are currently at in life.

I've been told to grow up in the past. Pissed me totally and completely off at the time. Got told this a number of times, and could not support doing otherwise.

So, I went ahead and got that done. It was the right thing to do, no matter how annoyed I was with it at the time. It's also a process that is not yet complete. I don't know that it ever really completes, but I do know the big learning and adjusting happens early on. Crossing that hump is hard, the rest is just a steady journey that's no big deal most of the time.

The people encouraging me to do this had roughly the same motivations I posted above.

So please, do it. If you can't support it, think hard about why this is, but don't whine about it.

If you really don't like these kinds of conversations, do something about it; otherwise, they are likely to continue. Truth is, I could just ignore you, poke fun, etc... and not really give a crap. IMHO, it's better to just put it on the table and grapple with it than not, so here it is.

Ball is in your court DD. Are you gonna suck it up and start playing with the big kids, or just toss the ball back and keep whining about stuff you have total control over?

The president received complaints these US attorneys wer not investigating voter fraud, why is it a big deal he fired them?

In the immigration code, theres a part that says, any non citizen that votes in a US election, forfits his right ever to become a citizen, and any naturalized citizen that is found to have voted in a US election before his naturalization forfits his citizenship.

It has never been enforced.

Nwokie says:
The president received complaints these US attorneys wer not investigating voter fraud, why is it a big deal he fired them?

Because that isn't why he fired them. The issue, in case you missed it, is that the Justice Department and the White House appear to have lied or at been misleading about why they were fired. The story has changed several times. Originally the attorneys were fired for "performance" issues; then it came out that most of them had outstanding performance records. Now we've learned that Harriet Miers and Gonzales were talking about firing them for loyalty issues months before they were fired. Oops.

Members of Congress sort of frown on being lied to. That's why even Republicans are pissed off about this.

It's not about immigration my friend. Stop trying to change the subject.

Andrew

Oh, they are worried about that, but not so worried about all the other fraud that may well have put them in power in the first place?

Diebold, et al. not getting things right can be ignored, but we need really strong enforcement of this law for why exactly?

Missing kskd, do you think you have an anger management problem?

Considered counseling?

No and No.

I'm not angry.

DD sez: "Maybe you should you should write about it, instead about me."

DD later said: ". . . do you think you have an anger management problem?

Hmm . . . another example of hypycrital behavior. Do as you say, not as you do, eh?

I don't know how angry rants accomplish anything. Aren't they an example of trolling?

Why would you consider a post encouraging you to think critically an "angry rant" or a "troll"?

Definitions of Troll on the Web:
As a verb, to post controversial or provocative messages in a deliberate attempt to provoke flames.

a newsgroup post that is deliberately incorrect, intended to provoke readers; or a person who makes such a post.

In Internet terminology, a troll is a person who enters an established community such as an online discussion forum and intentionally tries to cause disruption, often in the form of posting messages that are inflammatory, insulting, incorrect, inaccurate, absurd, or off-topic, with the intent of provoking a reaction from others.

Okay DD get your head out of the sand.

The attorney's were fired and that is perfectly legal. However under the recent Patriot Act renewal the replacment Federal Attoneys do no have to go through a hearing process before the Senate.

Therefore if the attorneys that were fired were doing a terrible job the executive department would inform the Congress that they had an issue with a Federal Attorney and have them removed and have the new Federal Attorney waiting in the wings for confirmation.

Instead on December 7th several were removed and no replacements have been forwarded to the senate for confirmation. What ever happened to advise and consent? It's part of the Constitution.

Let's hear from you right wingers, debate this point that the replacements have not been forwarded for confirmation before the Senate.

I wonder if 44DD's is a troll?