Thoughts on Gonzales
By Erick Posted in The White House — Comments (42) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
I am not sorry to see AGAG go.
First, the rumor, even here in Germany, is that Chertoff is the replacement. Considering all the folks I'm with, it sounds very credible.
Second, can I just say that those of you who hated John Ashcroft need to think again. All we have learned, all we have seen these past few years with AGAG at Justice better make the Ashcroft haters come to their senses.
Third, expect some seriously bad news from Justice in the next few days. AGAG's resignation was not the end, but the beginning. Why else do you think he did it today instead of Friday, the start of a three day holiday weekend?
« McClellan Originally Wanted to Attack Media, Defend Bush — Comments (5) | Gonzales Resigns — Comments (51) »
Thoughts on Gonzales 42 Comments (0 topical, 42 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
One problem with governors becoming President is that the tend to bring people who may have done a decent job in Arkansas or other such place with them, and they often find themselves completely out of their depth. I'd have to look more closely, but I wonder how often cronies from state government end up becoming embarrassing.
but somewhere in the middle - after Card, Rumsfeld, Miers, McNulty, Goodling, Rove, Ashcroft, etc. - but there's plenty more cleaning-up to be done, yessir.
Rumsfeld/Bolton is the leading combo for the R ticket in RS polling. You won't see much criticizing him here.
If you mean Josh Bolten, not John Bolton, I don't know what to say. I never followed that inside-inside baseball White House staffing.
Edward Kennedy, (Asks Russia for help defeating America)Here
John Kerry (asks North Vietnam for help defeating America)Here
Jay Rockefeller(asks Syria for help defeating American)Here
Rep Murtha (asks America to defeat itself)Here
Just the tip of the iceberg on corrupt Democrats. Haven't gotten any where near the Jefferson scandal or many many more.
Immediate action is needed to clean out these problems.
"It is unfortunate that so close to the anniversary of Hurricane Katrina President Bush has chosen the man who proved to be incomptent in handling our nation's greatest natural disaster. The Attorney General's office is in need of major clean-up from Hurricane Alberto, and Secretary Chertoff has already demonstrated he cannot handle that sort of job."
FEMA's response to Katrina was grossly inadequate, and poorly managed. You can make a case that most of the blame for the immediate federal response lies with Michael Brown, but even the reconstruction has been wasteful and plagued with fraud.
He certainly has not demonstrated that he can run a large, important organization.
On the other hand, his confirmation hearings wouldn't just be a long rehash of some fired US Attorneys...
Are you sure the response wasn't as good as it could be, given the utter failure of Governor Blanco to respond in time?
in NOLA was no different than any other FEMA response to any other natural disaster. FEMA has always been a poorly run, slow-to-respond organization. The only difference this time is that GWB is President!
Dems give Blanco and Nagin pretty much of a free pass even though they were both absolutely horrible, especially Blanco. They put all the blame on Brown/Chertoff/Bush. If things went better in Mississippi, it's not because Haley Barbour spent his time doing things other than looking for the nearest TV camera like Blanco did, but rather because Brown/Chertoff/Bush gave more help to a Republican governor than they did to a Democratic one.
im guessing that democrats will accept no one else except someone who is fully willing to impeach bush and execute what tandamounts to breaches between seperation of powers.
The Congress doesn't need Attorney General cooperation to impeach. All they need is Nancy Pelosi to break her campaign promise and give it the green light.
sorry, working on just a couple hours of sleep here.
What I meant was that Democrats will demand that the AG be their lacky and push through investigations and those subpeonas.
In short, Democrats will want a democrat AG dedicated to taking the President down, not serving justice properly.
It would last until (practically) the end of Bush’s term (the start of the next Congress Jan 2009)
Robert Bork might be nice.
Is Tom DeLay a lawyer? Think so.
While hard to top John Ashcroft, I’ll try and come up with some more ‘make Teddy Kennedy puke’ names
You don't want Gonzales running for an elected office. He might be a good lawyer, but we don't really know much about his politics at all. That has been his major problem - a lack of political experience.
1. Gonzales has already won statewide elective office – the Texas Supreme Court is an elected body.
2. Lloyd Doggett is a Nancy Pelosi acolyte and every bit as liberal as she is, if not more liberal. There may be congressmen who are as bad, but none are worse than Lloyd Doggett.
The district is 52% anglo, 10% black, and 34% Hispanic.
Alberto Gonzales and Carole Keeton Strayhorn are two Republicans who could really thump Doggett in this district. While Tom DeLay wasn't able to cobble together enough solid R votes to guarantee this seat for a Republican, he hated Doggett and did his best to make this a competitive district. As entrenched as Doggett is, though, it's going to take a brand name candidate to oust him.
"52% anglo, 10% black, and 34% Hispanic."
What does that have to do with anything.
Plus Carole Keeton what's my name this year should be put out to pasture with her son Scott McClennen.
if you think that AG is a viable candidate for anything more prestigious than dog catcher in Central Texas, or that Grandma Strayhorn has any stroke down here either. AG's a pariah everywhere now, but twice as hated in the People's Republic of Austin and Grandma made a fool of herself on the gov trail last year and has now managed to burn bridges with both parties. She's done.
You'd be laughed out of the room even at a YCT meeting here for even throwing those out there. Unfortunately, Doggett's not going anywhere, but I suppose that's fair enough since his district is over 60% Dem. Spending a pile of money on some "name" going after him would be a fool's errand. There are much more viable targets down here.
Be nice or i'll slap you cross-eyed!
- Granny
Gonzales was appointed to the Texas Supreme Court. From there he moved to the White House as Bush's White House Counsel. He's been appointed by G. Bush to every public sector office/position he has held.
From the DOJ bio:
Prior to serving at the Department of Justice, he was commissioned as Counsel to President George W. Bush in January of 2001. Prior to serving in the White House, he served as a Justice of the Supreme Court of Texas. Before his appointment to the Texas Supreme Court in 1999, he served as Texas' 100th Secretary of State from December 2, 1997 to January 10, 1999. Among his many duties as Secretary of State, Gonzales was a senior advisor to then Governor Bush, chief elections officer, and the Governor's lead liaison on Mexico and border issues.
See the third paragraph:
http://www.usdoj.gov/ag/aggonzalesbio.html
He was appointed to fill an unexpired term of the first Hispanic on the Texas Supreme Court, then elected to that seat in the 2000 election. The Dems didn't even put up anyone aginst him in that 2000 race. (Nor did they run anyone against Nathan Hecht (Meiers defender) or Priscilla Owen.)
Refs:
http://www.supreme.courts.state.tx.us/court/j4.asp
http://www.sos.state.tx.us/elections/forms/2000gen.pdf (page 19)
However, I wasn't taking his 2000 "election" seriously as a real election (one that might prepare him for a contested political race). That said, your correction does give a clearer picture of AG's record.
time for someone to clean up the Ramos Compean mess
if all the Dems have is the case of firing the 8 attorneys, and investigations,... when are the going to become productive? Like have they submitted their budget yet? Where's the MRAPs the military has requested?
Any other helpful legislation?
So there appears to be much criticism from the political clerisy, armchair lawyers, "me-too's" and other detractors of Mr. Gonzales. Beyond the rush to “pig pile” I have not seen an honest, comprehensive articulation of the pros vs. cons which pointedly and unquestionably puts him in the Schumer-esque mold of unfit to be AG.
Having to shepherd and answer for some of the most controversial changes in our law, Gonzales became one of the favorite Democrat targets. What needs to be further understood is that while there may also be cause to question the man, for many detractors it is mostly the message. It therefore becomes fairly dangerous to separate the two as it creates vulnerabilities. In furtherance, this can potentially be used as a launching pad to attack laws and programs the AG was defending on behalf of this administration and as a cudgel against Republican’s in general. The mantra will become corruption, incompetence, dishonesty, and etcetera. It will be another avenue to attack the President and his administration more directly, something that will not end with Gonzales’ departure.
While I certainly did not agree with Gonzales completely and have my own questions especially about DoJ management, I for one do not cheer this departure for several reasons. First, the collateral impact may include further negative changes to policies which have kept us safe, secondarily political opportunism and third loyalty to a man that has done his best to serve this country. So count me out of the celebration.
"Dulce et decorum est pro patria mori"
Contributor to The Minority Report
I was never a big fan of AGAG, but he seems like a decent enough fellow, pretty bright, but more of a judge than an executive. Which means he was more suited to the law than to do the political/managerial things of running the DoJ (meaning I blame Bush for not putting into a position to succeed, but just trying to put him into a position in where Bush could then "promote" him to SCOTUS).
It was amazing to me after reading Supreme Conflict (highly recommended book) how AGAG was the only one of President Bush's inner circle that was opposed to the nomination of Harriet Miers (and himself) to the Supreme Court because he foresaw the reaction that conservatives were going to have.
___________________________________
The CIA has better politicians than it has spies - Fred Thompson
I just don't care. If this guy, in our top law enforcement office, isn't 'wowing' me, then I think we can do better.
I don't think the AG's office should be used to groom somebody for the Supreme Court. But we know that's moot now...
I am not sure that "wowing" would be at the top of my list of AG qualities. In fact, this is one of the top jobs I believe is generally occupied by a rather uninspiring, academic lawyer types. But I understand your point.
Here are the types of unsubstantiated quotes that concern me;
"I have long believed that Alberto Gonzales subverted justice to promote a political agenda, and so I am pleased that he has finally resigned today. The President needs to nominate an Attorney General who will be the people's lawyer, not the President's lawyer, and in an Obama Administration that person will first and foremost defend and promote the rights and liberties enshrined in our Constitution," said Obama.B. Obama
Or
"I think we should set a standard that the next Attorney General cares about the rule of law more than he cares about protecting the president. That the next attorney general….when he takes an oath to uphold the constitution, he actually means it, understands it, and will protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. When it comes to issues like torture and surveillance, the military commissions, the firing of U.S. attorneys because they wouldn't pursue a partisan political agenda, we need to be especially vigilant and strong in making sure whoever the president appoints will work with the congress to bring us back from this precipice that this administration has put us on.
H. Clinton
Frankly, this is just the begining. But where is any of this honestly substantiated?
"Dulce et decorum est pro patria mori"
Contributor to The Minority Report
It wouldn't surprise me if Obama and Clinton were fuzzy on the facts. Socialism tends to require that.
I have to choose my battles though, and AGAG wasn't it.
The liberals liked to make fun of and harass Ashcroft re porn, but it was Gonzalez that actually actively worked at harassing the porn industry, all in the name of 'protecting the children'. As if we don't have to worry about a lot worse than porn out there-- like terrorists trying to kill us.
---
(Formerly known as bee) / Internet member since 1987
Member of the Surreality-Based Community
...a long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right...
---Thomas Paine---
is smart and reliably conservative. Why give the Dems an opportunity for a food fight. Leaving him Acting for as long as possible, then give him a recess appointment.
*Washington, that is. Not the commie rag from NYC.
Zell Miller for AG! I'd like to see a few duels. Cheaper than a UFC pay per view. I heard Randy Couture lost the other night.
It's time for a slick willie fresh start with the new AG and fire all the former admin prosecutors.
Ask not what you can do for your country, ask what your country can do for you. Washington Elected Elite
Probably a great guy, but he was in over his head from Day 1. Even though I am from Texas and I like many of the members of the original Texas crew Bush brought with him - some of them just weren't ready for the major leagues.