hokie4redskins Posted August 30, 2007 Share Posted August 30, 2007 Love her or hate her, she's funny. RENO 911 August 29, 2007 This week, congressional Democrats vowed to investigate Attorney General Alberto Gonzales' firing of himself. Gonzales has said he was not involved in the discussions about his firing and that it was "performance-based," but he couldn't recall the specifics. Right-wingers like me never trusted Gonzales. But watching Hillary Rodham Clinton literally applaud the announcement of Gonzales' resignation on Monday was more than any human being should have to bear. Liberals' hysteria about Gonzales was surpassed only by their hysteria about his predecessor, John Ashcroft. (Also their hysteria about Bush, Rove, Rumsfeld, Cheney, Libby, Rice, Barney and so on. They're very excitable, these Democrats.) Liberals want to return the office to the glory years of Attorney General Janet Reno! There is reason to believe Reno is precisely the sort of attorney general that Hillary would nominate, since Reno was widely assumed to be Hillary's pick at the time. As ABC News' Chris Bury reported the day Reno was confirmed: "The search for an attorney general exemplifies Hillary Clinton's circle of influence and its clout. ... The attorney general-designate, Janet Reno, came to the president's attention through Hillary Clinton's brother, Hugh Rodham." Let's compare attorneys general: -- Civilians killed by Ashcroft: 0 -- Civilians killed by Gonzales: 0 -- Civilians killed by Reno: 80 -- Innocent people put in prison by Ashcroft: 0 -- Innocent people put in prison by Gonzales: 0 -- Innocent people put in prison by Reno: at least 1 that I know of -- Number of obvious civil rights violations ignored by Ashcroft: 0 -- Number of obvious civil rights violations ignored by Gonzales: 0 -- Number of obvious civil rights violations ignored by Reno: at least 1 -- Number of innocent civilians accused of committing heinous crimes by Ashcroft: 0 -- Number of innocent civilians accused of committing heinous crimes by Gonzales: 0 -- Number of innocent civilians accused of committing heinous crimes by Reno: at least 1 Number of 6-year-old boys deported to totalitarian dictatorships by Ashcroft: 0 Number of 6-year-old boys deported to totalitarian dictatorships by Gonzales: 0 Number of 6-year-old boys deported to totalitarian dictatorships by Reno: 1 Number of U.S. attorneys fired by Ashcroft: 0 Number of U.S. attorneys fired by Gonzales: 8 Number of U.S. attorneys fired by Reno: 93 For entire article........ http://www.anncoulter.com/cgi-local/welcome.cgi :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted August 30, 2007 Share Posted August 30, 2007 Funny? This is the funny part... This week, congressional Democrats vowed to investigate Attorney General Alberto Gonzales' firing of himself. Gonzales has said he was not involved in the discussions about his firing and that it was "performance-based," but he couldn't recall the specifics. Two sentences. The rest is crap... and worse then that, it's such obvious crap that's been gone over again and again that only the most right wing person would look at it and now immediately identify it. Then again, her fans aren't interested in truths Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted August 30, 2007 Share Posted August 30, 2007 I guess I missed teh funny. Oh well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ACW Posted August 30, 2007 Share Posted August 30, 2007 Number of obvious civil rights violations ignored by Gonzales: 0Number of obvious civil rights violations led by Gonzales: too many to count Fixed :doh: Not to defend Reno, but what an Gonzales apologetic hack piece that is. Of course, this is the same Coulter who thinks McCarthy was okay :doh: :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bang Posted August 30, 2007 Share Posted August 30, 2007 She's funny. But then again, Josef was said to be a hoot at parties. Propaganda Shmopaganda! ~Bang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
headexplode Posted August 30, 2007 Share Posted August 30, 2007 She's funny.But then again, Josef was said to be a hoot at parties. Propaganda Shmopaganda! ~Bang Nice. Ann Coulter is not funny, and cannot be funny for the same reason that many politicians and idealogical hacks cannot be funny: she has no sense of irony or self-deprecation. The things they find funny in the "other side," they cannot find funny when it happens on their side. They may be funny to people who believe in the same limited idealogy that they do, but those people similarly have little to no sense of humor. People like Stewart and Colbert, though, make fun of whoever is there to make fun of, and that's why they enjoy such widespread respect, even among those who may not agree with a lot of the things they have to say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
headexplode Posted August 30, 2007 Share Posted August 30, 2007 Fixed :doh: Not to defend Reno, but what an Gonzales apologetic hack piece that is. Of course, this is the same Coulter who thinks McCarthy was okay :doh: :doh: She doesn't think he was okay, she thinks he was a certifiable ****ing American Hero. What a worthless **** she is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rincewind Posted August 30, 2007 Share Posted August 30, 2007 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
helptheSKINS Posted August 30, 2007 Share Posted August 30, 2007 I don't understand why everyone hates her so much. I think she is as balanced in her reporting as anyone. I feel the same way about the NY Times. She is just trying to get information out to the people. Joking (except for the comparison to the NYT) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
USS Redskins Posted August 30, 2007 Share Posted August 30, 2007 I am a Republican and I do not like Coulter but you have to admit the whole US Attorneys firing thing is funny. "They were fired for political reasons," is the big chant - OF COURSE THEY WERE! Wake up! Unless you are deaf, dumb and blind - this happens ALL the time! Clinton did it - Bush I, Reagan etc...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
81artmonk Posted August 30, 2007 Share Posted August 30, 2007 Well, like her or not you cannot deny facts. And the facts about her firing AG's on her watch is kinda hard to deny. The other facts are true, but open to interpretation. I swing towards her side on this one. What I find just outrageous is that the DEMS are still going after him!! What do they want......him to resign again. The only reason could be to, in a round about way, get Bush. He resigned, he isn't around anymore, what more could they want?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted August 30, 2007 Share Posted August 30, 2007 Well, like her or not you cannot deny facts. And the facts about her firing AG's on her watch is kinda hard to deny. The other facts are true, but open to interpretation. I swing towards her side on this one. What I find just outrageous is that the DEMS are still going after him!! What do they want......him to resign again. The only reason could be to, in a round about way, get Bush. He resigned, he isn't around anymore, what more could they want?? I wonder how long it's going to take some of you to pull your heads out of the sand on this. No one is upset that attorneys were fired. No one. The reason people are up in arms is WHY they were fired (politics) and if that same reason was used to hire new ones. The dept. of justice is not supposed to be a political arm. Also you people seem to struggle with the fact that AG lied to congress. That ALONE is a reason to go after him. If you happily lie to congress then it's a safe assumption that you have a reason to lie. What that is should matter to congress and the country. Keep pretending this is about people getting fired, you just like stupid by doing so. Also could the reason they are still going after him be they honestly think he did something wrong and don't think simply resigning is enough? This is the guy that argued your right to due process wasn't really a right... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
81artmonk Posted August 30, 2007 Share Posted August 30, 2007 I wonder how long it's going to take some of you to pull your heads out of the sand on this. No one is upset that attorneys were fired. No one. The reason people are up in arms is WHY they were fired (politics) and if that same reason was used to hire new ones. The dept. of justice is not supposed to be a political arm. Also you people seem to struggle with the fact that AG lied to congress. That ALONE is a reason to go after him. If you happily lie to congress then it's a safe assumption that you have a reason to lie. What that is should matter to congress and the country. Keep pretending this is about people getting fired, you just like stupid by doing so. Also could the reason they are still going after him be they honestly think he did something wrong and don't think simply resigning is enough? This is the guy that argued your right to due process wasn't really a right... See this is where you and I see differently. If it is a right of the president to fire AG, than I don't really care why? I can't see giving the pres that power than when he uses it, turning around and saying, "hey wait a minute, you can't use it that way". That's just my view. Personally, I don't believe it was political. on the surface from what I've read, it was a job performace issue. They weren't getting the job done. Personally, I'm glad he resigned. I am angry at him and Bush for ignoring Ramos and Compeone the border patrol agents who were wrongly jailed for doing thier job. I think that is more of a travesty than anything else he's done Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
USS Redskins Posted August 30, 2007 Share Posted August 30, 2007 Dude - OF COURSE THEY WERE FIRED FOR POLITICS! Why do you think Reno fired all of them? Because they were bad typists? No! Because they were not on her team! That is political! The AG's office is supposed to be out of the political realm but RIGHT! like that has EVER been the case. You can say what you want about him otherwise, and I would even agree with some of it. And Coulter is really not funny. She really isnt even very clever when she gets into little fights with people. She gets all huffy and cant think of anything clever to say and actually I think thats funny. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted August 30, 2007 Share Posted August 30, 2007 When former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales was asked recently if Dubya asked him to step down, Gonzales thought for a few moments and replied, "I don't recall". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
helptheSKINS Posted August 30, 2007 Share Posted August 30, 2007 93 under Clinton - 8 under Bush Funny how the media didn't turn it into a scandel in the Clinton days. I agree that Gonzalez screwed the firings up. From what I read, he had plenty of reason. He should have just said they were fired because....... I think it's best that he's gone. I just feel bad for the person that takes his place. A target will be on his back from the start. Also, Coulter is a horses A.S.S. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted August 30, 2007 Share Posted August 30, 2007 See this is where you and I see differently. If it is a right of the president to fire AG, than I don't really care why? I can't see giving the pres that power than when he uses it, turning around and saying, "hey wait a minute, you can't use it that way". Welcome to America - we've had restrictions on why people can be fired for years. It's not a new concept. Kicking out attorneys there were actively investigating republicans is corruption and unethical. LYING TO CONGRESS about it will cause even more trouble. Again - lying to congress. You guys sure realized this was a big deal when Clinton did it. Amazing how all that outrage over dishonesty goes away with Bush. I guess it's just assumed his entire administration is lying and you're all cool with that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted August 30, 2007 Share Posted August 30, 2007 93 under Clinton - 8 under BushFunny how the media didn't turn it into a scandel in the Clinton days. I agree that Gonzalez screwed the firings up. From what I read, he had plenty of reason. He should have just said they were fired because....... I think it's best that he's gone. I just feel bad for the person that takes his place. A target will be on his back from the start. Also, Coulter is a horses A.S.S. Clintons admin didn't fire a select few many of whom where engaged in investigations of members of his own party... and then lie about it. It's amazing how hard this simple concept seems to be for some to grasp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
portisizzle Posted August 30, 2007 Share Posted August 30, 2007 Number of U.S. attorneys fired by Ashcroft: 0 Number of U.S. attorneys fired by Gonzales: 8 Number of U.S. attorneys fired by Reno: 93 ORY??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
helptheSKINS Posted August 30, 2007 Share Posted August 30, 2007 Clintons admin didn't fire a select few many of whom where engaged in investigations of members of his own party... and then lie about it. It's amazing how hard this simple concept seems to be for some to grasp. I'm sure you did plenty of research on the firings under Reno since the media obviously did not. I will look forward to seeing all the research you have put into each case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hokie4redskins Posted August 30, 2007 Author Share Posted August 30, 2007 93 under Clinton - 8 under BushFunny how the media didn't turn it into a scandel in the Clinton days. I agree that Gonzalez screwed the firings up. From what I read, he had plenty of reason. He should have just said they were fired because....... I think it's best that he's gone. I just feel bad for the person that takes his place. A target will be on his back from the start. Also, Coulter is a horses A.S.S. Gonzalez only screwed it up because he didn't say......... "These attorneys work at the pleasure of the President. He can terminate them at his discretion and without cause if he so chooses. End of story." But he didn't, and this turned into the biggest non-story since Plame-gate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
helptheSKINS Posted August 30, 2007 Share Posted August 30, 2007 Gonzalez only screwed it up because he didn't say........."These attorneys work at the pleasure of the President. He can terminate them at his discretion and without cause if he so chooses. End of story." But he didn't, and this turned into the biggest non-story since Plame-gate. Exactly. Some on here think refusing to investigate democrats or refusing to enforce laws against illegal immigrants is fine. I certainly don't. I've said it before, I lean conservative but I don't appologize for Rep or Dems. I'm just amazed at the hypocrisy of the dems in this situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted August 30, 2007 Share Posted August 30, 2007 I'm sure you did plenty of research on the firings under Reno since the media obviously did not. I will look forward to seeing all the research you have put into each case. It is really not that complicated. Traditionally, all US attorneys are replaced when a new President comes in. Clinton replaced pretty much all of them when he came in in 1992, all 93 of them. That's what Presidents do, Clinton, Reagan, whoever, they all put their own people in. That is why there was no "scandal" back in 1992. However, once the new President is in office, US attorneys generally are not fired except under extraordinary circumstances. The reason for that is obvious. The US attorneys' job is to investigate and prosecute crimes, including crimes by political allies of the President. When 8 US attorneys are fired in the middle of a President's term, it is not an unreasonable question for Congress to ask - Why were they fired? For example, were they fired to squelch an investigation into actions by an ally of the President? Then, when the Attorney General goes to Congress to answer this question and his testimony is hopelessly incoherent and is contradicted by other people's testimony, things get even dicier. He looks like a liar. That is why Congressional leaders from BOTH parties wanted him to go. I think you guys are being deliberately obstuse. This is not that complicated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hokie4redskins Posted August 30, 2007 Author Share Posted August 30, 2007 I think you guys are being deliberately obstuse. WHAT.............did you call me? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted August 30, 2007 Share Posted August 30, 2007 Whoops, you are right. Obtuse, not obstuse. :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.