In the defense of Alberto Gonzales

@gewcew23 (8011)
United States
August 27, 2007 3:28pm CST
As I am sure everyone has heard today, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales resigned today. I can already hear the cheers from the pinko liberal commie section of the world which seems to be 90% of mylot. Even though I know that I should have absolutely no right to defend any of my fellow Republicans, I AM GOING TO! So, if you want to write a response to this discussion, telling me that I am some Neo-Con fascist one world order crazy lunatic, go right ahead and write it because I know that you can help yourself because it is part of your mental illness called liberalism. Alberto Gonzales was nominated by Pres. Bush 2 1/2 years ago. Even then Dems. felt that Pres. Bush had no right to pick an AG that he actually wanted. Only 6 Dems. voted to affirm Gonzales as the United States Attorney General. Even though after that, Alberto Gonzales did an excellent job at being the US top law enforcement officer. He skillfully defended cases that helped with the war on terror. Everything seemed to be ok until he did something that every AG takes for granted, that God given right that every attorney general has had since the beginning of time and that is the right to hire and fire US district attorneys. US District Attorneys just like every other executive appointee serves at the discretion of the president. Sure Janet Reno the attorney general under Bill Clinton, fired 98 US district attorneys in one swope. That doesn't matter, Alberto Gonzales had absolutely no right to fire 8. Now let me get this right, liberal hypocrites, Janet el Reno gets to fire 98 and no one blinks an eye, but Alberto Gonzales fires 8 and everyone starts crying bloody murder. How much could one man take? How many times could he defend his actions against leaky Leahy, and his fellow partisan hacks? I mean come on folks, do you think if the tables were turned, do you think it would have played out differently? Let me paint this picture for you so you can see what I am getting at. A Dem. president appoints a Latino american as attorney general. That attorney general fires 8 US district attorneys. That attorney general starts coming under fire from a bunch of white republicans, the question I ask to you, How quickly do you think the race card would be thrown down? No my friends that just won't work. Even though Alberto Gonzales was Latino (the first ever), he was a republican. Even though all those Senators were white, they were Dems, and we all know that Dems have no ability to be racist, even though they were the party of segregation and slavery. Atleast, Alberto Gonzales, can chalk one achievement up on his board. He never ordered a military assault on a US civilian target. Janet Reno can chalk that up to her achievement, but I forget she was a Dem. and nothing that she did was wrong.
2 people like this
3 responses
• United States
27 Aug 07
I have never heard a good reason why Gonzales should resign. I still do not know why Rumsfield resigned. Either we are not being told the whole story about these resignations or something is really screwy in D.C.
3 people like this
@bobmnu (8160)
• United States
27 Aug 07
President Bush should have gone before the American people and demanded that Congressional Leaders show in the Consitiution where Congress has the power to review the President firing a political appointment. I think this is all part of a power grab by congress. They want to cripple the President and take the focus off of themselves. What has congress acheived this session. Just what some on the radical left said, tie up the president with invesgations and committee meetings so that he can do nothing. Any wonder why congress has an 18% approval rating. They should all resign and not run in the special election and get some new blood in there. That way we might get something done. Alberto Gonzales was and is a good man. Crooks like to hang out with other crooks and congress can not stand to deal with an honest man.
@NeoComp (1320)
• United States
28 Aug 07
Yes what we need is a President who will FOLLOW and constituion. All this talk about not following it is very dangerous, and only leads to a rule like hitler's.
1 person likes this
@anniepa (27236)
• United States
29 Aug 07
I haven't heard anyone say any President doesn't have the right to fire a political appointee; the questions were about the way it was handled and the facr that some of these fired prosecutors had been "leaned on" concerning cases they were working on, also the fact they had been publicly criticized for having done a poor job. It should be pointed out that these are political appointees but their positions are not political. They are U.S. Attorneys, not attorneys for the White House. Other Presidents also have fired all of their federal justices at once but never in the middle of a term like Bush did. Gonzales was a good man to Bush; he kept his DUI arrest covered up for him for one! Congress cannot stand to deal with an honest man...what honest man would that be? The American people are disappointed with this Congress because they were elected to bring our troops home and end this terrible, worthless war; too many people misunderstand how much power Congress actually have and how much of a majority is really needed to get done what they'd like to get done! We only have 511 days until this horrible National Nightmare is over! By the way, I'm proud to be called a liberal and I'm NOT a commie and I'm not THAT insane...LOL...and I'm not about to take any bait and call anyone here names! Annie
@bobmnu (8160)
• United States
16 Jun 08
President Bush received complaints from Democrat Senators about the performance of some of the US Attorneys. California was a very poor performer and was not taking on any case unless he was sure to win it and refused to charge Coyoites (People smugglers) unless the Border patrol could produce a large number of US Citizens to testify against them. Senator Feinstein in a letter to the AG wanted him replaced. In the hearings she gave some support to the person she wanted fired. From the beginning when President Bush worked with Senator Kennedy on the No Child Left Behind Bill he was warned that cooperation in Washington had become one way of late. When the No Child Left Behind Act became a problem who got blamed for it? President Bush and it was by the very Democrats who supported it. This and many other actions by Congress is nothing more than Dirty Smeer Politics. Who complained when President Clinton fired all the US Attorneys and stopped several investigations against Democrats including one out of Little Rock, AK?
1 person likes this
@NeoComp (1320)
• United States
28 Aug 07
I am glad Gonzalez is gone! Anyone who supports Bush should be gone. Thank God Karl Rove left. Now if only Rice, and Cheney would leave we'd have a pretty good white house. Better yet Ron Paul will kick them all out.. restore our republic... restore the constituion and end the war. not only is 90% of mylot aware that this war on terror is really the war on privacy and liberty... But 80% of the military knows the TRUTH. So keep worshipping a new world order. Your new world order is failing.. and WILL FAIL!!!!!!!! Ron Paul for President in 08! Down with Hillary! Down with Obama! They are both CFR puppets.
1 person likes this