Thursday, May 24, 2007

Wasn't it big of Monica to admit that she "may have gone too far" with her law-breaking? Of course, she doesn't seem to get that she WAS law-breaking


I know the Devil is in the details, and I know that any reasonable scrutinizer of Monica Goodling's House Judiciary Committee testimony yesterday would surely agree that it was massively incriminating--certainly for its clear confirmation that her old boss the attorney general has been lying up the wazoo, and for her own grudging admission that she "crossed the line" (i.e., broke the law against politicizing appointments at every opportunity she had).

Nevertheless, I have to stand by my impression yesterday based on quick perusal of the Firedoglake live bloggings: no big deal. Because I can't help thinking that to people who don't understand the stakes here, meaning the American public, it will all be dismissed as (a) legal technicalities and (b) "politics? they all do it."


Remember how the concept of the "smoking gun" has been redefined in contemporary American politics. Democrats are guilty of anything and everything, the minute anyone thinks of anything to accuse them of (if not sooner). Republicans, however, and especially far, far right Republicans, aren't guilty of anything until you've got enough evidence to force them into plea-bargaining.

And of course under the Cheney Rule, even if you're caught with an actual smoking gun in your own personal hands, you're not guilty of anything, and in fact it's your victim who owes you an apology.

Labels: ,


At 9:27 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

What do you want to bet that Dems will fail to impeach Abu Gonzales? A more worthless bunch of dickheads I have never seen.

Six years of wanton criminal mischief, and the Dems fail, and continually fail, to impeach Bush.

Years of an illegal, immoral, and POINTLESS war, and the Dems STILL fail to stop it.

The many crimes of Bush Sr. and Reagan go unpunished. Who's to blame? The Democrats, of course.

Even that worthless turd Nixon escalated the Vietnam War (yet another illegal, immoral, and pointless conservative war) for five more years, and the Democrats did nothing. They STILL would have done nothing, but that was before the Washington Post went over to the Dark Side.

People tell me that I should vote for Democrats, because the republicans are worse. I don't see it. The way I see it, the Democrats are worse, because they are in a position to stop evil, and do not.

At 10:47 AM, Blogger KenInNY said...

I feel your pain, me, and certainly can't disagree with much of what you're saying.

There's no question in my mind that Democrats are better than Republicans, all in all, but I can see where for some people it might be getting to be a close call. And the infuriating thing is that so many Dems seem to think they don't have to DO anything to maintain this thinning measure of moral superiority.

Still, for what it's worth, it's only because the Dems took control of both houses of Congress that there we're even finding out about the way the Bush Justice Dept. has been run. And as a questioner in's online chat yesterday with David Iglesias (see my report below) suggested, and the fired U.S. attorney agreed, as a result of this scrutiny it's going to be very difficult for the Bush regime to mess with U.S. attorneys for the rest of its sorry life.


At 12:23 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"There's no question in my mind that Democrats are better than Republicans"

I've been watching them for more than 40 years, and I can tell you that they have sucked during all that time. In 1968, the election was all about Vietnam. The Democrats nominated a fat worthless John Kerry by the name of Humphrey. He hemmed and hawed, refused to denounce the war, and lost because of it.

In 1972, the Dems nominated - entirely by accident and against the wishes of the party bosses - a truly great American (and WWII bomber pilot), George McGovern. Those same party bosses saw the end of their cushy jobs coming, and abandoned McGovern in droves, even endorsing Nixon, explicitly or implicitly.

It was similar in the 1980's. Reagan was an absolutely horrible president, guilty of numerous crimes, including terrorism. The Dems did NOTHING. Even today, not a single one of those nitwit cowardly bastards will tell the truth about Reagan. And Reagan led us to Bush! Bush is what Reagan would have been, if he had been younger.

"it's only because the Dems took control of both houses of Congress that there we're even finding out about the way the Bush Justice Dept. has been run"

I don't agree. I think everyone already knew how the JD was being run. Because of Leahy and Conyers, it's now being publicized, but IT DOESN'T MATTER! The Attorney General of the United States is guilty of multiple felonies, and the Democrats refuse to impeach him!! It turns my stomach.

As long as I've been watching politics, it's been this way, approximately. In the 1960's and 1970's, republicans were 80% bad, and the Democrats were 40% bad. Nowadays, the repubs are 100% bad, and the Dems are 60% bad.

I just cannot support this stinking turd of a Democratic Party any more. What I'd like to see is Conyers, Leahy, Feingold, and the other good ones bolt the party, and take as many with them as possible. The remaining Liebermans, Nelsons, and Feinsteins will then either turn repub officially or get slaughtered in the elections. Either way would be an improvement.

But the Democratic Party? Fuck 'em. I might vote Green, or not vote at all. At least the Greens ( are demanding Bush's impeachment, which NOT ONE SINGLE DEMOCRAT - NOT ONE!!! has the guts to do.

At 12:48 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...



Post a Comment

<< Home