- Schaffer vs. Udall
- View From A Height
- Thinking Right
- Mt. Virtus
- Rocky Mountain Right
- Slapstick Politics
- Daily Blogster
- Hugh Hewitt
- Hot Air
- Fox News
- Real Clear Politics
- Rocky Mountain News
- Denver Post
- Debka Files
- Talking Points Memo
The Senate Race
Rocky Mountain Alliance of Blogs, 2.0
My personal musings about anything that gets on my radar screen--heavily dominated by politics.
|Some Unsolicited Advice for the White House|
Answer A: "Serve at the pleasure of the President"
Answer B: "NUTS"
I don't know what's gotten into these guys, but over the course of the last three years the political operation has become . . . lackluster. So now that the Congressional Democrats have all the power, including the subpoena, I think the White House has two very obvious answers to make to Congress.
The Justice Department advocated in early 2005 removing up to 20 percent of the nation's U.S. attorneys whom it considered to be "underperforming" but retaining prosecutors who were "loyal Bushies," according to e-mails released by Justice late yesterday. . . .
The dismissals, and the Bush administration's shifting explanations for them, led a growing number of lawmakers to demand Gonzales's resignation this week. Justice Department documents released Tuesday refuted the contention that the White House was not closely involved. . . .
...yesterday, the Justice Department notified the Senate Judiciary Committee that four senior aides, including Deputy Attorney General Paul J. McNulty, would be made available to Senate investigators.
The committee had authorized subpoenas for the four officials and Sampson.
Subpoenas for Rove, Miers and deputy White House counsel William Kelley were delayed for a week as the Judiciary Committee continued negotiations with the White House over their testimony.
So . . .
STOP RUNNING FROM THESE GUYS! Send Rove, send Miers, send Kelley, send Gonzales, and instruct them to deliver one message to Congress:
"United States Attorneys serve at the pleasure of the President. He may hire them, fire them, move them, remove them, or reappoint them AT WILL. And while there are certainly political considerations in any such arrangement, the fact is that there is no controversy here--only the actions of the Executive as described in the Constitution. And, yes, I was aware of the conversations about this, and took part in them, and, ultimately, agreed that the course of action taken was the best one."
End of story. Instead, these guys run around and negotiate like they're trying to hide something, when instead they should welcome this and face it directly.
Democratic legislation to set timelines for the removal of troops from Iraq headed for a showdown on the House floor next week after the Appropriations Committee approved a $124 billion war funding bill yesterday that would end the U.S. role in the conflict by next year.
The committee's vote kept the controversial legislation moving forward, even as the Senate scuttled its own legislation to bring troops home.
In a way, I kinda hope this one makes it through the House and the Senate on straight party-line votes. Then, when it arrives on the President's desk, he can respond to it in the same way that another American famously responded to a call for surrender:
Don't stamp the veto, don't sign it--just write on it in clear, bold letters: NUTS.
It's time to take a page from the playbook of Ronald Reagan. Stop coddling these guys, stop trying to play nicey-nice, and stop compromising principles. STAND YOUR DAMN GROUND and force Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi to articulate their ideas.
We're making it way too damn easy for the Democrats to make much sound and fury, signifying nothing.