MESSAGE TO HARRY REID: LOOK HOW WELL THAT NON-BINDING THING WORKED LAST TIME-- MAYBE YOU SHOULD TRY SOMETHING ELSE ON GONZALES... IMPEACHMENT, MAYBE?

All bark, no bite?

According to Bob Novak, the right wing nuts he knows are pissed that Bush still hasn't pardoned Libby and is wasting his meager capital on preserving Gonzales. "Prevailing opinion among Republican office holders, contributors and activists could not differ more from Bush's posture. They regard Libby as a valuable public servant who faces serious prison time thanks to prosecutorial abuse made possible by Bush administration decisions. They see Gonzales as an embarrassment to the party who presides over a hollow Justice Department while presidential staffers search for Senate votes to block a no-confidence motion."

Fred Thompson and the fascist little cabal around him seem especially incensed-- and eager to exploit it to help him appeal to the dominant Know Nothing wing of the Republican Party. One of Thompson's hard right staffers, Victoria Toensing slammed Bush last week: "If the president can pardon 12 million illegal immigrants, he can pardon Scooter Libby."

In contrast, Republican insiders are enraged by Bush's retention of Gonzales, whom they consider a political and governmental disaster. Beyond his affection for Gonzales, the president is reported to fear that a new attorney general could not be confirmed without pledging to name a special prosecutor to investigate the firing of U.S. attorneys. That explanation suggests a lame-duck regime, preferring to stay with a crippled, leaderless Justice Department.

Republican insiders who complain about Bush filling mid-level government vacancies with "children" cite a classic case. In September 2005, the president named Julie L. Myers, then 36, to head the Department of Homeland Security's Immigration and Customs Enforcement bureau. She has never been confirmed, amid bipartisan agreement that she lacks the five years of management experience required by statute.

Which brings us to today's charade. I have to say I'm starting to lose faith in Majority Leader Reid. (I'm not alone either.) First I watch him and Speaker Pelosi blow whatever chance Democrats in Congress had to end the Iraq occupation with all this non-binding crapola. Then I hear about a secret deal with Miss McConnell to let arch-bigot Leslie Southwick slip through the judicial confirmation process and now we're back to the non-binding resolutions again. Even Bush and Cheney are laughing at him. "They can try to have their vote of no confidence, but it's not going to determine-- make the determination, who serves in my government,'' Bush told reporters. in Bulgaria. "There's been no wrongdoing.''

An impeachment hearing would show our badly-in-need-of-an-education president and his dwindling cadre of supporters what wrongdoing is. Reid owes that to the country. Instead we get a theatrical, fairly meaningless "No Confidence" vote. Snarlin Arlen Specter, in predicting that Abu Gonzo would resign if it was voted that he had no confidence, is wrong. Gonzales might as well sit back and scratch his balls and collect his fat paychecks; after this he's not going to have an easy time getting gainful employment.

Worse yet, Reid knows full well that Miss McConnell has the parliamentary clout to keep the No Confidence vote from even being voted on and that it will die in a morass of procedural nonsense with even Republicans who have expressed how aghast they are at the way Gonzales has destroyed the Department of Justice, sticking with the Bush Regime-- as they always do. (Have you heard the term "rubber stamp?")

"I'm not going to comment on the kind of job" Gonzales has done, Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., said Sunday on CNN's "Late Edition." "The vote is whether we should take a vote to express a lack of confidence by the Senate. That's wrong."

...Democrats say it's only right for senators to go on record, since five Republicans have called outright for Gonzales' dismissal and many more of the president's party have said in public comments that they have lost confidence in him.

"If all senators who have actually lost confidence in Attorney General Gonzales voted their conscience, this vote would be unanimous," said Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., who authored the resolution with Sen. Diane Feinstein, D-Calif. "We will soon see where people's loyalties lie."

I agree with the Bush Regime. Wrong doing needs to be shown. Gonzales should be subjected to a full on impeachment trial, not a charade meant to embarrass him and make him feel badly. If Reid can't get anything done, he should step aside and let the Democrats elect someone who can.


UPDATE: LET'S WATCH THEM VOTE

Reid may not be much of a floor leader-- at least not for our side-- but his office sends out cool info to bloggers. Here are a list of Republican senators who have said things publicly about Abu that would indicate they have no confidence in him. So a tug... their natural rubber stamp predisposition vs what they know is right. These are Republicans; rubber stampitis trumps all. Fun to watch anway; here's the score card:

•  Senator Arlen Specter (R-PA), Ranking Republican on Senate Judiciary Committee: "I have a sense that when we finish our investigation, we may have the conclusion of the tenure of the attorney general...I think when our investigation is concluded, it'll be clear even to the attorney general and the president that we're looking at a dysfunctional department which is vital to the national welfare.'" (Senate Judiciary Committee Hearing, 5/17/07)  
• Senator Pat Roberts (R-KS): "When you have to spend more time up here on Capitol Hill instead of running the Justice Department, maybe you ought to think about [stepping down]" (AP, 5/16/07)  


• Senator John McCain (R-AZ):  "I am very disappointed in [Alberto Gonzales'] performance . . . I think loyalty to the president should enter into his calculations. . . .  I think that out of loyalty to the president that [resigning] would probably be the best thing that he could do."  (Washington Post, 4/25/07)  


• Senator John Sununu (R-NH):  "The president should fire the attorney general and replace him as soon as possible with someone who can provide strong, aggressive leadership." (Reuters, 3/15/07)


• Senator Gordon Smith (R-OR): "'For the Justice Department to be effective before the U.S. Senate, it would be helpful' if Gonzales resigned, Sen. Gordon Smith, R-Ore., told USA TODAY this afternoon." (USA Today, 3/15/07)  


• Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK):  "But to me, there has to be consequences to accepting responsibility. And I would just say, Mr. Attorney General, it's my considered opinion that the exact same standards should be applied to you in how this was handled.  And it was handled incompetently. The communication was atrocious. It was inconsistent. It's generous to say that there were misstatements. That's a generous statement. And I believe you ought to suffer the consequences that these others have suffered. And I believe that the best way to put this behind us is your resignation." (Judiciary Committee Hearing¸ 4/19/07)


• Sen. Norm Coleman (R-MN):  "Sen. Norm Coleman, R-Minn., said Thursday that he would like to see Attorney General Alberto Gonzales resign, calling into question Gonzales' credibility and his ability to focus on his job. 'I don't believe that Gonzales has the type of leadership that the department needs,' he said." (Minneapolis Star-Tribune, 5/17/07)  


• Senator Jeff Sessions (R-AL):  "There are some problems that he just hasn't handled well, and it might just be best if he came to a conclusion that the department is better served if he's not there." (AP, 4/20/07)  


• Senator Chuck Hagel (R-NE):  "The American people deserve an attorney general, the chief law enforcement officer of our country, whose honesty and capability are beyond question . . .Attorney General Gonzales can no longer meet this standard. He has failed this country. He has lost the moral authority to lead." (Washington Post, 5/16/07)


• Senator Lindsay Graham (R-SC):  But at the end of the day, you said something that struck me, 'That sometimes it just came down to these were not the right people at the right time.' If I applied that standard to you, what would you say? (Judiciary Committee Hearing¸ 4/19/07)