Quote:
 Originally Posted By: Wonder Boy
 Originally Posted By: Matter-eater Man

He had no problem dumping Rumsfeld after the election results in '06. He flipped on that so fast he risked whip-lash.

Gonzales is doing exactly what Bush wants him to do. As it is now he gets the benefit of Gonzales taking some of the heat for it. (kind of had that with Rumsfeld [too])

And I believe Brownie feels differently about Bush's "loyalty" these days. Something about being made a scapegoat I believe.

Harriet Miers was supported by Bush until he knew he couldn't get her in because his base wouldn't allow it.



And your point is what, MEM ?


It seems to me you're dedicated to believing the absolute worst about Bush and other Republicans, often on total speculation and a complete lack of facts. Whereas in the same situation, you defend Democrats under the same allegations, and attribute Republican pursuit of justice in those cases to petty vindictiveness, no matter how clear and incriminating the evidence.

I realize you feel that way but I see you & G-man being guilty of much of what you accuse me of. It pretty much comes down to all of us having some biases when expressing our opinions. There was a post not so long ago where I said the Dem looked guilty. It's just not as simple as what your saying.

 Quote:
First off, Bush didn't pardon Libby. Your assumption that he'd pardon Libby, now that Libby's already out of jail, and has paid a 250,000-dollar fine, is pure speculation.


Since I was clear that it was my opinion I'm not sure why you bring it up as if your sorting something out. Do you feel speculation is wrong?

 Quote:
And meanwhile, you conversely ignore that Clinton is the biggest abuser of presidential pardons in the history of the office. With an unprecedented 141 last-minute pardons to wealthy political contributors, federal criminals, and other assorted Friends-of-Bill.


Ah the Clinton defense. You know you can always count on it. I didn't ignore it though nor defend them. I did point out how they were different. I also think if Clinton had stepped in the way Bush did with Libby you guys would be yelling.

 Quote:
Rumsfeld submitted his resignation to Bush 4 times before the November 2006 election, as Rumsfeld himself said multiple times in front of reporters at press conferences.

Bush finally replaced Rumsfeld with Robert Gates after the Democrats won big in the November 2006 election. I'd call that the minimum action on Bush's part to open the possibility of getting cooperation with Democrats (Democrats who were elected on an anti-war agenda). And at that point, as I recall, Rumsfeld had been the longest-serving Secretary of Defense in the history of that office.

That just makes the case that Rumsfeld was the loyal one. Bush finally accepted his resignation after it became a political liability.

 Quote:
What you say about Gonzales "doing exactly what Bush wants him to", "Taking heat for Bush" is speculation, and could be said about any Bush appointee who is accused of something and stays in office.
Frankly, I wish he'd resign, and be replaced by someone who would restore faith in the attorney general's office. As I wished Rumsfeld to resign as well.
Why is it a case of wishing they would have resigned? As you pointed out Rumsfeld offered a couple of times. It seems this "Bush is just to loyal" thing is a pretty good deal for him.

 Quote:
However scapegoated Michael Brown might be, he still absolves himself of all reponsibility for what happened with Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans. As do the Democrat governor of Louisiana, the other elected Democrat Senators and Representatives of Louisiana who neglected funding for stronger dams and levi's, and then blamed it all on Bush, as also did the mayor of New Orleans. All of whom could have done more to prevent the disaster in New Orleans, but were all too happy to heap the entire blame at Bush's doorstep.


They could have done more & Bush could have done more. And if we're talking about blame at the local level I would be interested in hearing your thoughts how a Mayor could have done a better job protecting his city from a terrorist attack.

 Quote:
While I strongly opposed the Harriet Miers nomination, I think Bush hung onto the nomination as long as he could, up until he saw it was impossible, and saw he'd get no cooperation, even from his fellow Republicans. He didn't give up on Miers until it was clear she'd never be confirmed.

Is that really unusual for Presidential nominations?

Last edited by Matter-eater Man; 2007-07-22 1:46 AM.
Fair play!