Wednesday, March 14, 2007


“Clinton supporters contend that the firings of the 93 US attorneys and the seven Travel Office employees were the right of the Clinton administration because anyone appointed to such positions serves at the pleasure of the president. This is true. It is also true that the eight US attorneys fired by Gonzalez served at the pleasure of the current president.

That the Democrats choose to start this obvious battle is very telling indeed.” [emphasis mine, not Pam’s]

What is telling to me is the level of hypocrisy the Democrats are willing to display quite blatantly. Clearly they have misunderstood the 2006 election results entirely and are under the impression that life as they knew it “BN” (before Newt) with all the cronyism, dishonesty and deals-under-the-table, running the U.S. government as they deem comfy-cozy without regard to law or ethics. Of course, this very incestuous relationship also flourished before their buddy Al Gore invented the Internet.

The absolutely stunning contempt for the intelligence of this nation’s voters – which in some venues is justified but in most is not – is blindingly evident. But then, throughout the 20th century in particular, they’ve managed to get away with it so often, they probably feel they are invulnerable. To say that the Democrats have become tone deaf is to sugarcoat matters.

There is one thing that life has taught me. When someone feels they are bullet-proof, that’s when they start making fatal and stupid mistakes. The Democrats believe they are Teflon-coated and that can and will be their downfall, if we are alert enough and unyielding enough to expose their dishonesty and corruption.


Sissy Willis said...

Let's roll!

Anonymous said...

Didn't Republicans criticize Clinton for those firings? Aren't they defending Bush now?

How is that not equally hypocritical?

Gayle Miller said...

No we did NOT criticize him. By law it is the President's right to fire AT WILL any U.S. Attorney - all of whom serve at the President's PLEASURE.

What Republicans criticized were the firings of the TRAVEL OFFICE personnel - which were subsequently deemed to be wholly improper by the courts. Also Republicans criticized MRS. CLINTON'S possession of over 900 confidential FBI files which she had no business in law or in common sanity to have!

Paul - you're a delightful commenter but please let's keep the facts straight, shall we?

Anonymous said...

New York Times, page 20, 3/25/93

The Republicans called Attorney General Janet Reno's demand on Tuesday for the resignations of all United States Attorneys "a massacre."

Anonymous said...

Forget it Paul. These people are just hate filled Bush cultists. They are traitors to conservative ideals and their only purpose now is to spew simplistic bullet points that don’t stand up to even the most cursory rebuttal.

This comic says it all.

Anonymous said...

Great one. Precisely why we must soldier forward, friend!

Funny how they've excused every single thing Bush has done, even the outing of the CIA agent.

Imagine if Clinton had done that, for any reason?

Gayle Miller said...

Hate filled? I have to laugh. I never called any American president derogatory names, not even William Jefferson Clinton whose general behavior I found a great deal more than wanting!

At least the right has SOME plan - flawed though it might be. What exactly do the libs stand for - other than ANYONE but Bush?

Gayle Miller said...

And I didn't hear any response to my question about why Mrs. Clinton had 900 FBI files ILLEGALLY, or WHY the travel office staff that was completely non-political was summarily fired - and they were subsequently vindicated of the false charges.

Then there's Sandy Berger stealing ORIGINAL files (we now find) from the National Archives. What was he covering up? Badly, I'll admit.

Anonymous said...

The first sentence was proven a lie.

The rest falls from that.

Anonymous said...

Of course, this very incestuous relationship also flourished before their buddy Al Gore invented the Internet.

Your mention of this bogus canard renders the rest of the post not worth reading. As you and everyone else knows, Gore never said that. But even if he did, what has it to do with the issue you're supposedly wrting about???

Gayle Miller said...

Paul - I usually respect you. But you are way out in left field this time.