Go Back   I-Mockery Forum > I-Mockery Discussion Forums > Philosophy, Politics, and News
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
sspadowsky sspadowsky is offline
Will chop you good.
sspadowsky's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Thrill World
sspadowsky is probably a spambot
Old Mar 15th, 2007, 01:39 PM       
Quote:
I was providing a very good example to highlight how this is not bad nor abnormal behavior.
No words in the English language can explain how vehemently I disagree with this. CHECKS AND BALANCES CHECKS AND BALANCES CHECKS AND GODDAMN MOTHERFUCKING BALANCES I WILL SAY IT OVER AND OVER until people start realizing how truly dangerous this behavior has become.

You show me another administration that has so consistently so thoroughly trodden on and circumvented the Constitution, and I will shut up.

Until then.....

CHECKS AND BALANCES CHECKS AND BALANCES...... etc.....
__________________
"If honesty is the best policy, then, by elimination, dishonesty is the second-best policy. Second is not all that bad."
-George Carlin
Reply With Quote
  #2  
mburbank mburbank is offline
The Moxie Nerve Food Tonic
mburbank's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: right behind you
mburbank has disabled reputation
Old Mar 15th, 2007, 01:49 PM       
From Slate:

The White House and DoJ are now under fire because, in disrespecting the post of U.S. attorney, they appeared to interfere with the independence of that office in a way that's unprecedented. In the previous quarter-century, according to the Congressional Research Service, no more than five and perhaps only two U.S. attorneys, out of 486 appointed by a president and confirmed by the Senate, have been similarly forced out—in the middle of a presidential term for reasons not related to misconduct. "It would be unprecedented for the Department of Justice or the president to ask for the resignations of United States attorneys during an administration, except in rare instances of misconduct or for other significant cause," White said when she testified in February about the Bush firings before much was known about them. Previous midterm removals include those of a Reagan U.S. attorney fired and convicted for leaking confidential information and a Clinton appointee who resigned under pressure after he lost a major drug case and allegedly went to an adult club and bit a topless dancer on the arm. This time, the stories are quite different.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Preechr Preechr is offline
=======
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: NA
Preechr is probably a spambot
Old Mar 15th, 2007, 02:41 PM       
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.
__________________
mburbank~ Yes, okay, fine, I do know what you meant, but why is it not possible for you to get through a paragraph without making all the words cry?

How can someone who obviously thinks so much of their ideas have so little respect for expressing them? How can someone who so yearns to be taken seriously make so little effort?!
Reply With Quote
  #4  
sspadowsky sspadowsky is offline
Will chop you good.
sspadowsky's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Thrill World
sspadowsky is probably a spambot
Old Mar 15th, 2007, 03:01 PM       
Yeah, I concede that Congress signed off on the deal, so they're not guilt-free. I hope that they do fix it.

Sometimes the people in charge frustrate me so much, it feels like screaming is about all that's left to do.
__________________
"If honesty is the best policy, then, by elimination, dishonesty is the second-best policy. Second is not all that bad."
-George Carlin
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Preechr Preechr is offline
=======
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: NA
Preechr is probably a spambot
Old Mar 15th, 2007, 09:45 PM       
Well, I hate it for you. Please don't pin your hopes on whoever happens to be in charge as of 08, cause I guarantee it's gonna be SOSDD, if not even worse, as far as political heroism goes. I have yet to see a contender that would stand a chance against Bush 04 or Clinton 96, which is just sad. Welcome to the era of American Idiocracy.
__________________
mburbank~ Yes, okay, fine, I do know what you meant, but why is it not possible for you to get through a paragraph without making all the words cry?

How can someone who obviously thinks so much of their ideas have so little respect for expressing them? How can someone who so yearns to be taken seriously make so little effort?!
Reply With Quote
  #6  
mburbank mburbank is offline
The Moxie Nerve Food Tonic
mburbank's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: right behind you
mburbank has disabled reputation
Old Mar 16th, 2007, 02:58 PM       
It's a late welcome.

I think Gonzales is a gonner at this point. The story hasn't stayed the same from the Whitehouse for even a news cycle, Republicans are begining to call for his ouster, and the President has said Gonzales 'enjoys his complete confidence', which is almost always beurocries for "I'm just about to fire you."
Reply With Quote
  #7  
mburbank mburbank is offline
The Moxie Nerve Food Tonic
mburbank's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: right behind you
mburbank has disabled reputation
Old Mar 20th, 2007, 09:35 AM       
WASHINGTON - President Bush sent a powerful message of support Tuesday for embattled Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, calling his longtime friend to express unwavering support in the face of calls for his resignation.


Isn't this kid of like when a Mafia Don kisses you?
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

   


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:05 AM.


© 2008 I-Mockery.com
Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.