[an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive]
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
[an error occurred while processing this directive]

Alberto Gonzales
Tuesday, April 3 at 1:03 PM


Robert Lipton of Lakewood writes:

Senator Leahy’s judiciary committee is conducting a political witch-hunt to find out if the white house firing of eight political appointees was political..... meanwhile the country’s business is ignored and we continue to pay these fools.

This letter has not been edited.


READER COMMENTS

Do not forget that those stinking donkeys also promised not to stop funding the troops and now they are doing just that. The liberals do not care what happens to this country only what happens to the amount of money that lines their pockets.

Posted by Tim on April 3, 2007 09:36 PM

It's not that he fired them, it's that the reasons given were bogus.

All previous administrations fired large numbers of their prosecuters - it is after all part of the executive branch, they are allowed to hire and fire.

This time they tried to smear the people being fired, and that backfired.

Posted by on April 3, 2007 09:41 PM

No Moron,

The brouhaha is about the top law enforcement offical in the country Alberto "Fredo" Gonzales lying to congress when he said the firings weren't political, and he wasn't involved.

Posted by on April 3, 2007 09:41 PM

He lied. He also covered up a pedophilia scandal in Texas.

Posted by Geraldo on April 4, 2007 07:07 AM

Tim get your head out of Fox Noise and get the facts. Democrats ARE funding the troops. It's Bush and the "Republics" that want to veto that funding.

Posted by on April 4, 2007 07:14 AM

941 all you far left socialist can do is cry about everything that goes on now and its always a lie. we all know that no body in the dumocrat party would ever lie to us.
714 the veto is because of the pork your guy want added like the 25 million for a spinach farmer in california.

Posted by Earl on April 4, 2007 07:29 AM

Tim - Earl;

backing the redumblicks and their history breaking pork tied to many bills, amendments, slipped in the dead of night to legislation etc., etc. of the 109th congress demonstrates the ignorance of some of you on the right who criticize those serving in congress today. lefties or righties are wrong to tie pork to any bill, amendment, etc., etc. however, are we to ignore and allow to walk free, randy “the dukester” cunningham, jack abramoff and tom delay for in richening themselves from the pork they tied to the many military bills and appropriations for the troops?

your statements of conviction are unwarranted at best when compared to the 109th congress' excessive use of pork regarding military appropriations etc., etc.

Posted by JEB on April 4, 2007 08:44 AM

"Democrats ARE funding the troops. It's Bush and the "Republics" that want to veto that funding."

As the pres warned he would do if congress attached a withdrawal timetable. So my question is, if you're forwarned of a path not to venture down, why would you take that path? And how can you blame the consequences of your actions on someone else?

Posted by on April 4, 2007 08:46 AM

the donkeys illustrious leader...harry reid...stated yesterday that he will stop funding the troops if he doesn't get his way...whine whine whine.......sounds like a typical democratic temper tantrum.

Posted by Tim on April 4, 2007 10:35 AM

Pork has been inserted in many spending bills for eons by BOTH parties. The truth is that many, if not most in Congress don't bother to read the bloated, hundreds of pages that these bills become before voting on them. Therefore, they are blissfully unaware of what is in them. But you can't go back to your district without bringing home the bacon, can you? Pork spending has ballooned out of control during the past decade.

This is why a line item veto is needed or single issue bills - neither of which we will ever see in our lifetimes. Self interest by our elected officials.

If Gonzales lied to Congress, which seems likely at this point, he should be gone. It's likely he'll be gone soon, one way or another.

Politicians caught in wrongdoing or other politicos tied to them, such as staffers, lobbyists, etc. should be held accountable. That has happened with those Republicans like Cunningham and Delay. Wonder when we will see the Dems do the same? Remember "cold hard cash" Rep. Jefferson from Louisiana? Still in Congress. Hmmmmm.......politics, as usual.

Posted by Skeezix on April 4, 2007 10:42 AM

Hey Tim, you should shut up and sign up

Posted by Obvious on April 4, 2007 10:44 AM

Skeezix - the line item veto, brought to light by the Reagan admin., was ruled by the Supreme Court to be unconstitutional. Clinton, tried it and now "w" wants it too.

The line item veto has been ruled by the Supreme Court during Reagan's tenure as President to be unconstitutional therefore, the argument is mute.

Posted by JEB on April 4, 2007 11:10 AM

What a laugh...RepubliCONS accusing the Dems of lading a bill with pork. RepubliCONS are the highest of all hogs. Does anyone remember Ted Stevens-Alaska (R) and his "bridge to nowhere" that went to some island with a bunch of rich people on it? It seems to me that the ethically-challenged RepubliCONS have been exposed to the entire country to be the scoundrels that they have always been, and now that this has happened, they'll accuse the Dems of the same behavior to deflect the uncomfortable attention from themselves and their "Boy King" of a president.

Posted by Beavis on April 4, 2007 02:03 PM

If you campaigned on cutting the pork it's usually a wise to show some good faith and maybe do it on the first important bill you pass. But then again campaign promises are usually forgotten shortly after taking office.

The politicians forget first and the people who voted for them will later decide forgetting is better than having it known you were tricked for your vote. Kinda like Hillary claims in her vote to invade Iraq. It just doesn't look good on a resume that you fool easily and then duck for cover rather than face responsibility for your actions... But I digress.

I was most happy to see Pelosi out last week enjoying the sun. She sure seemed in good spirits while taking a dip in the swamp and mentions she has new plans. Rather than "draining the (pork) swamp" as she refered to it, she has decided to allocate the funding to build the swamp into a democrat run water theme park. Teddy just wants to know if there's a swim-up bar and where the switch is in case he needs to disable the underwater surveillance cameras.

Posted by KW on April 4, 2007 02:33 PM

Still, though, that's not as bad as Bush's plans to turn the White House into a cathedral and to base social security payments on how much people pray. I'm not sure how his plan to make Karl Rove the American pope will go over, however.

Posted by on April 4, 2007 08:49 PM

KW - At least get your facts straight.

Hillary and those of the 109th on both the left and the right voted to invade Afghanistan. Not Iraq. That power was given to "w" by the majority redumblicks of the 109th and he in turn on his own, invaded Iraq. Congress had nothing to do with the invasion. It was all about your buddy "w" who, hasn't done a damn thing for both you or me lately. (In case you haven’t been paying attention lately to your taxes as they go up and up through the generations of your family.)

Know why?

Because we work for a living. "w" hasn't got a clue what its like to actually work for a living. Never been there, never done it. He is the only President to have in a two term public service over 400 days logged as vacation. Yeah, he’s got the working classes best interest at the top of his list. Wake up and put down the pipe!

Posted by JEB on April 4, 2007 11:07 PM

JEB- Presidents don't take vacations. He may be in Crawford, Texas but, he is still doing his job. Basically, the White House moves to wherever he is. All presidents are on call 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.

Posted by Mike on April 5, 2007 06:46 AM

JEB wrote: "(In case you haven’t been paying attention lately to your taxes as they go up and up through the generations of your family.)"

Why have your taxes been going up JEB? My federal taxes have been going down the last 6 years. I remember back ing the 90's I did year to year comparisons and notice my federal tax liablility increased a few hundred dollars each year without any increase in income.

So far under this administration (in addition to income tax relief) I am enjoying a strong economy, record stock market numbers, a thriving 401k, large increases in real estate values, record low interest rates on installment and mortgage loans and a strong job market that has allowed me to climb in rank with a very successful corporation.

I guess I could be angry about all these benefits but my father always told me to be thankful that you have a hot meal and a roof over your head. Of course with all the benefits I'm currently enjoying I'm not just thankful, I'm ecstatic!

Posted by KW on April 5, 2007 09:00 AM

You are quite the happy chatterbox KW. But, you forgot to mention the power of your tin foil hat.

Posted by Buzz on April 6, 2007 03:09 PM

POST A COMMENT










Remember your personal info?






LATEST LETTERS
[an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive]
[an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive]