Attorney General Gonzales resigns

[De Selby]

Do you have any examples/proof of "lying" as opposed to the normal functioning of a very large government?
Cronyism?  Examples, please.
Mismanagement?  Please, show me anyplace that this administration has more mismanagement than others in similar situations.  Wherever you have large amounts of money thrown at problems (e.g. Katrina) you will have mismanagement if not outright fraud.  I remember when Wilson Goode burned down half of West Philly and the city had to rebuild the houses.  There was graft galore.  It is endemic to any situation like that.

If you can't see mismanagent, dishonesty, and good indictators that there is lying going on, this discussion is fruitless.  Take a read of any paper-there are no defenders for this administration left.  Even less so are there folks saying it's actually done and is doing a good job.

"It's so obvious that it isn't worth discussing" is an argument of last resort to people who's arguments suck.  Rhetoric 101.

Actually, I saw that that was just rhetoric and too strong and changed it before you could post.

It is, however, not worth discussing.

Be my guest to defend and worship the greatness of the Bush administration.  I can almost guarantee that you will be embarrassed by it in the future.

[Headless Thompson Gunner]

Be my guest to defend and worship the greatness of the Bush administration.  I can almost guarantee that you will be embarrassed by it in the future.

"Defend", yes.  "Worship", no.  "Embarrassed", not likely.

It is, however, not worth discussing.

You're probably right.  Life's too short to get caught up in this crap.  Let's agree to disagree.

I'm going for a bike ride.

[De Selby]

Be my guest to defend and worship the greatness of the Bush administration.  I can almost guarantee that you will be embarrassed by it in the future.

"Defend", yes.  "Worship", no.  "Embarrassed", not likely.

It is, however, not worth discussing.

You're probably right.  Life's too short to get caught up in this crap.  Let's agree to disagree.

I'm going for a bike ride.

Good idea-I think I'll head out for a stroll

[The Rabbi]

Do you have any examples/proof of "lying" as opposed to the normal functioning of a very large government?
Cronyism?  Examples, please.
Mismanagement?  Please, show me anyplace that this administration has more mismanagement than others in similar situations.  Wherever you have large amounts of money thrown at problems (e.g. Katrina) you will have mismanagement if not outright fraud.  I remember when Wilson Goode burned down half of West Philly and the city had to rebuild the houses.  There was graft galore.  It is endemic to any situation like that.

The mismanagement, lying, and failures speak for themselves.  There is no point in recounting all of them, as that would require twenty threads to hear arguments on every one.  Take a read of any paper-there are no defenders for this administration left.  Even less so are there folks saying it's actually done and is doing a good job.  The fact that absolutely no one wants to put his name behind the claim that the Bush administration is doing a great job and we'll all thank them for it should be telling to you.

So the fact that you cannot name one example of these things means we should continue to take you seriously?
The idea that no one says the Bush Administration is doing a good job (and there are people saying that, otherwise his approval rating would be zero) means ipso facto that he has engaged in lying, cronyism (whatever that is), and mismanagement?
Someone has a credibility gap here.  And it isnt the President.

[De Selby]

Do you have any examples/proof of "lying" as opposed to the normal functioning of a very large government?
Cronyism?  Examples, please.
Mismanagement?  Please, show me anyplace that this administration has more mismanagement than others in similar situations.  Wherever you have large amounts of money thrown at problems (e.g. Katrina) you will have mismanagement if not outright fraud.  I remember when Wilson Goode burned down half of West Philly and the city had to rebuild the houses.  There was graft galore.  It is endemic to any situation like that.

The mismanagement, lying, and failures speak for themselves.  There is no point in recounting all of them, as that would require twenty threads to hear arguments on every one.  Take a read of any paper-there are no defenders for this administration left.  Even less so are there folks saying it's actually done and is doing a good job.  The fact that absolutely no one wants to put his name behind the claim that the Bush administration is doing a great job and we'll all thank them for it should be telling to you.

So the fact that you cannot name one example of these things means we should continue to take you seriously?
The idea that no one says the Bush Administration is doing a good job (and there are people saying that, otherwise his approval rating would be zero) means ipso facto that he has engaged in lying, cronyism (whatever that is), and mismanagement?
Someone has a credibility gap here.  And it isnt the President.

No, it means we could waste pages and pages going back and forth claiming that this or that lie, perjury charge, investigation, illegal denial of access to the courts, etc etc situation were/were not actually a "scandal."  That is a pointless exercise.  I already listed the examples-you just don't accept them.  Fine.

Like I said, keep tooting the Bush horn.  See where it lands you in 2008.  The people who win that election will certainly have done so in part by acknowledging the broad, bipartisan agreement that Bush and his team are not good leaders. 

Maybe you think that's just a "media conspiracy", but if that's true, then 100 percent of the media is in on it, and there is no good information available about anyone.

[wmenorr67]

You can say all you want about the "bad" job that President Bush is doing, but have you noticed that Congresses approval rating is currently below that of the Presidents?!

[De Selby]

You can say all you want about the "bad" job that President Bush is doing, but have you noticed that Congresses approval rating is currently below that of the Presidents?!

I don't get what that means-because there are organizations out there even less popular than the whitehouse, it must be doing good?

Congress doesn't have to be doing great or poorly for the President to be doing a bad job.

[The Rabbi]

You can say all you want about the "bad" job that President Bush is doing, but have you noticed that Congresses approval rating is currently below that of the Presidents?!

I don't get what that means-because there are organizations out there even less popular than the whitehouse, it must be doing good?

Congress doesn't have to be doing great or poorly for the President to be doing a bad job.

Are you implying that the President's approval rating is a good indicator of the job he is doing?
When Truman left the White House he had a dismal approval rating.  If anything approval rating is an inverse correlation.

[De Selby]

You can say all you want about the "bad" job that President Bush is doing, but have you noticed that Congresses approval rating is currently below that of the Presidents?!

I don't get what that means-because there are organizations out there even less popular than the whitehouse, it must be doing good?

Congress doesn't have to be doing great or poorly for the President to be doing a bad job.

Are you implying that the President's approval rating is a good indicator of the job he is doing?
When Truman left the White House he had a dismal approval rating.  If anything approval rating is an inverse correlation.

It's certainly one measure, but more important is watching where the statements of disapproval come from, and what they relate to.

Bush has no bastion of support from any side of the aisle.  His flagship project is failing miserably and he's refusing to cooperate with any investigations of the broad array of serious allegations against the whitehouse. 

Comparing him to Truman is really well..like I said, watch what happens in 2008.

[The Rabbi]

Oy.
The Republicans are running scared simply because of his low approval ratings.  No one with a hope of being elected/re-elected really wants to be around him.  This is politics.
As for where the disapproval is coming from, it is coming from the MSM.  That should say enough right there.
As for refusing to cooperate, he is right.  The Dems are on a fishing expedition to tie up his administration and discredit it in any way possible.  They said they would do as much prior to the last election.  It is a cynical political move that ought to bite them in the butt, but won't.  Republicans are too nice and too scared of charges of partisanship (gasp!) to dish that garbage out.

[wooderson]

When Truman left the White House he had a dismal approval rating.

Miring the nation in a war that isn't going well does that to a fellow.

[wooderson]

interesting - check page 2 for the poll numbers 'worth fighting'/'not worth fighting' for October-November 1952.
http://www.eisenhower.utexas.edu/Korea/documents/publidcopiniononthekoreanwar.html

[Perd Hapley]

shootinstudent, I agree that the administration has alienated many, perhaps most, of those who re-elected Bush a few years ago.  Together with Congress, Bush has failed to give the people the conservative leadership they voted for twice. 

Acknowledging the obvious failure of the Bush administration to accomplish much of anything,

That just doesn't stand up to scrutiny.  The administration has certainly accomplished much in dealing with terrorism.  And please don't be so naive as to think that 2008 is going to be a real measure of the actual competence or leadership of the Bush Administration.  That would be a foolish way to evaluate any administration in any country.

As for refusing to cooperate, he is right.  The Dems are on a fishing expedition to tie up his administration and discredit it in any way possible.  They said they would do as much prior to the last election.  It is a cynical political move that ought to bite them in the butt, but won't.  Republicans are too nice and too scared of charges of partisanship (gasp!) to dish that garbage out.

Correct.  The administration has cooperated with witch-hunts against itself far more than it should have. 

[De Selby]

The administration has certainly accomplished much in dealing with terrorism

How???  Al Qaeda has managed to completely dismantle even the charade of an international alliance in the war on Iraq.  They got Spain out of Iraq overnight, and broke Britain's leadership over the anvil of the Iraq issue.  Terror attacks are on the rise worldwide, and enemies of the United States are now poised to capture the leadership of three countries that were at one time US allies.  That is not a success story against terrorism.

Correct.  The administration has cooperated with witch-hunts against itself far more than it should have. 

In what way has the administration cooperated in any investigation at all concerning alleged wrongdoing in the Whitehouse?

[roo_ster]

SS:

Have you been in a cave?  Or have you just filtered out all facts no conforming to your expectations?

Just one example:  The Plame Snipe Hunt.  GWB required all his boys & girls in the White House to release any reporters with whom they spoke of reporter/leaker privilege.

Well, it turned out that the leaker was Armitage in the State Dept, one of Powell's cronies.

[De Selby]

SS:

Have you been in a cave?  Or have you just filtered out all facts no conforming to your expectations?

Just one example:  The Plame Snipe Hunt.  GWB required all his boys & girls in the White House to release any reporters with whom they spoke of reporter/leaker privilege.

Well, it turned out that the leaker was Armitage in the State Dept, one of Powell's cronies.

So I suppose Libby perjured himself because there was nothing to hide and because all was on the up and up?  That investigation was long and tortured, and it's not the only one on the plate.  But it certainly warranted attention-and Rove's participation in the investigation was nothing short of Clinton-esque in its "I never knowingly..." and "I don't recall" moments.  He was nearly indicted in that case, like others in the admin.

 If Clinton had given explanations like these to defend his whitewater and lewinsky scandal behavior, we'd have worn out our "lol" keys in laughter on this board. 

[Paddy]

Al Qaeda has managed to completely dismantle even the charade of an international alliance in the war on Iraq.  They got Spain out of Iraq overnight, and broke Britain's leadership over the anvil of the Iraq issue.  Terror attacks are on the rise worldwide, and enemies of the United States are now poised to capture the leadership of three countries that were at one time US allies.

We'll just have to keep killing them until either they give up or are no more.  And don't think for a minute Americans don't have the stomach for it.  Watch what happens should anybody attack this country again, on our own soil. It will make no diff who's in the WH, even if it's (please, God, no) Hillary. There will be hell to pay.

[Paddy]

So I suppose Libby perjured himself because there was nothing to hide and because all was on the up and up?  That investigation was long and tortured, and it's not the only one on the plate.  But it certainly warranted attention-and Rove's participation in the investigation was nothing short of Clinton-esque in its "I never knowingly..." and "I don't recall" moments.  He was nearly indicted in that case, like others in the admin.

 If Clinton had given explanations like these to defend his whitewater and lewinsky scandal behavior, we'd have worn out our "lol" keys in laughter on this board.

Wow.  You really think the theatrics of American politics have serious legal implications?  Or are even serious investigative inquiries?

No more Geraldo for you. 

[wmenorr67]

You can say all you want about the "bad" job that President Bush is doing, but have you noticed that Congresses approval rating is currently below that of the Presidents?!

I don't get what that means-because there are organizations out there even less popular than the whitehouse, it must be doing good?

Congress doesn't have to be doing great or poorly for the President to be doing a bad job.

No I never said that the President was doing good or otherwise.  However, compared to Congress he is doing a better job.  Of course that would take much at this time.

Everyone wants to jump on and say how bad a job the President is doing but yet won't state how bad Congress has been.

And in my opinion this second term has been less than stellar it is a lot better than some one and only terms, Carter, and really how many second terms in recent history has been better or equal to the first.

[Perd Hapley]

The administration has certainly accomplished much in dealing with terrorism

How???  Al Qaeda has managed to completely dismantle even the charade of an international alliance in the war on Iraq.  They got Spain out of Iraq overnight, and broke Britain's leadership over the anvil of the Iraq issue.  Terror attacks are on the rise worldwide, and enemies of the United States are now poised to capture the leadership of three countries that were at one time US allies.  That is not a success story against terrorism.

Woah, hold on now.  I didn't say that Bush has terrorism all wrapped up and taken care of.  I said it had accomplished much.  And it has.  And, hey, I thought cooperation on Iraq had been "dismantled" by the enlightened concern of millions of good citizens worldwide who have stood up to Bush's evil war-mongering.     Now, this might sound like a joke, but it is not.  Bush does bear a lot of blame for letting "enemies of the U.S." get into a position to capture the leadership of the U.S.  Hail Hillary.   

Correct.  The administration has cooperated with witch-hunts against itself far more than it should have. 

In what way has the administration cooperated in any investigation at all concerning alleged wrongdoing in the Whitehouse?

[Perd Hapley]

Correct.  The administration has cooperated with witch-hunts against itself far more than it should have. 

In what way has the administration cooperated in any investigation at all concerning alleged wrongdoing in the Whitehouse?

What's the topic of this thread?  Gonzales just caved. 

[roo_ster]

SS:

Have you been in a cave?  Or have you just filtered out all facts no conforming to your expectations?

Just one example:  The Plame Snipe Hunt.  GWB required all his boys & girls in the White House to release any reporters with whom they spoke of reporter/leaker privilege.

Well, it turned out that the leaker was Armitage in the State Dept, one of Powell's cronies.

So I suppose Libby perjured himself because there was nothing to hide and because all was on the up and up?  That investigation was long and tortured, and it's not the only one on the plate.  But it certainly warranted attention-and Rove's participation in the investigation was nothing short of Clinton-esque in its "I never knowingly..." and "I don't recall" moments.  He was nearly indicted in that case, like others in the admin.

 If Clinton had given explanations like these to defend his whitewater and lewinsky scandal behavior, we'd have worn out our "lol" keys in laughter on this board. 

SS:

You wrote (your emphasis on the word "any"):

In what way has the administration cooperated in any investigation at all concerning alleged wrongdoing in the Whitehouse?

To disprove such a sweeping statement, all is required is one counterexample, which has been provided.  Have the integrity to admit the statement is hogwash.