[Preechr]

That first linked report (the Congressional Resource Summary one) didn't take into account dismissals that happened at the beginning of a new Presidential term, like Janet Reno's dismissal of no less than 93 (or ALL) of the US Attorneys on March 24th, 1993. Oh, wait... March isn't the beginning of a new term... Hmmm... I'm sure there's some sort of reasonable explanation for there being no mention of that event in that summary. Let's see... The summary accounts for the time period between 81 and 06, so that's not it... I betcha it's got something to do with "left office before completion of their four-year terms..." So, I guess all 93 of those people must have been in their positions for at least four years when they were axed. I guess that makes it Ok, right? Whatever the reason for the ommission, I think that we know it happened and it's not addressed indicates a very narrow view of history in this regard.

For instance, how do we know how long these people typically serve? Is it customary for a new President to start fresh with his own people? Do they often serve for more than 4 years? Before we can start tagging this a freak, unprecedented anomoly and thus despicably evil, shouldn't we know that kind of stuff? Another thing: As far as your checks and balances, the Legislative Branch freely gave away their power to hold confirmation hearings on these guys. While it's currently working on legislation to get that power back, this is not a usurpation of power by the Executive Branch here. Congress screwed up, and they're working on fixing it.