Slashdot Mirror


U.S. Attorney General Resigns

willie3204 is one of many to mention that U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales has resigned. One of Gonzales' main opponents praised his decision stating that: "'For the previous six months, the Justice Department has been virtually nonfunctional and desperately needs new leadership,' said the Schumer statement. 'Democrats will not obstruct or impede a nominee who we are confident will put the rule of law above political considerations. We beseech the Administration to work with us to nominate someone whom Democrats can support and America can be proud of.'"

34 of 845 comments (clear)

  1. Now will the opposing party actually push back? by downix · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Right now, the opposition party has failed in it's watchdog duties. This resignation is only good news if they finally gain some moxie and push for a hard Atty Gen, one that will actually ensure oversight of the branches of government as the position is supposed to be doing.

    --
    Karma Whoring for Fun and Profit.
    1. Re:Now will the opposing party actually push back? by slughead · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Right now, the opposition party has failed in it's watchdog duties.

      Political parties have no duties, only the need and desire to keep themselves in power. Congress (controlled by Democrats) has one of the lowest approval ratings ever at present. They aren't pushing for anything now.

    2. Re:Now will the opposing party actually push back? by ajs · · Score: 4, Insightful

      There's no way that the Bush administration will put forth an actual watchdog. The best the Democrats can do is to block the nomination of one Loyal Bushy in favor of the next. No, I think they'll make a show of their resistance, but unless Bush puts forth someone who can't read or burns a copy of the Constitution on the steps of the Capitol Building before the hearing, the nomination will likely go through.

    3. Re:Now will the opposing party actually push back? by Xonstantine · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Republican support turned against Bush a while back. Calling your base racist and pushing through an amnesty for 20 million illegals when the base overwhelmingly opposes it tends to do that. What Republicans aren't in favor of is a purely political witch hunt. I mean, if there are more Duke Cunninghams out there either in the administration or Congress, by all means, throw them in the pokey. But while we're at it, how about we apply the same standards across the board? Pelosi seemed to back off pretty quick from her "drain the swamp" pledge considering that both Murtha and Jefferson are sitting on committees.

    4. Re:Now will the opposing party actually push back? by r_jensen11 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What Republicans aren't in favor of is a purely political witch hunt.

      Bull-fucking-shit. Care to try to explain the Clinton impeachment process then?

  2. Must be a bigger fascist in the bullpen. by base3 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Remember how excited everyone got when Ashcroft was fired^W^Wresigned? That's when Gonzales was put in. Be sure there will be someone just as pliable and loyal to the Party--and probably smart enough not to get caught perjuring himself. So I wouldn't get too excited.

    --
    One CPU cycle wasted on digital restrictions management is ONE TOO MANY.
    1. Re:Must be a bigger fascist in the bullpen. by Shakrai · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Remember how excited everyone got when Ashcroft was fired^W^Wresigned?

      Actually, Ashcroft was a right-wing asshole, with nothing better to do then go after sick people smoking weed (*gasp*, the horror!) but even he had misgivings about the direction this administration is taking civil rights and law enforcement.

      I'd take Ashcroft back over Gonzales in a heartbeat.

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
  3. It was about time by bogaboga · · Score: 5, Insightful
    What a stint Mr. Gonzales had with my president's White house...but I thought he'd hang on. I will remember him for his 63 times he invoked the "I don't recall..." mantra. On the other hand, I wonder whether any slashdotter can tell me what good has been accomplished by my president to-date. Sincerely, I am at a loss to find anything worthy of a mention.

    Here's another one...the VP also used this "I do not recall..." slogan while under fire. It's about time our constitution was amended to automatically have a senior official resign when the all of a sudden they cannot recall matters so important and held so dear to these United States.

  4. Re:slashdotliberalwinning by faloi · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Might be hard to believe, but a lot of conservatives aren't happy with the way things have been going throughout this administration. If anything could prove that Republican != Conservative, it's certainly been the Bush White House. I think the more things get shaken up, the more both conservatives and liberals win.

    --
    "It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education." -Albert Einstein
  5. Re:slashdotliberalwinning by rootofevil · · Score: 3, Insightful

    nobody wins until the balance of power is restored to the people, where it belongs.

    --
    turn up the jukebox and tell me a lie
  6. Reminds me to donate - by mattkime · · Score: 4, Insightful

    From the article: "Bush will likely nominate Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff to the position"

    Events like this remind me to donate to the ACLU.

    --
    Know what I like about atheists? I've yet to meet one that believes God is on their side.
  7. Not likely by WindBourne · · Score: 5, Insightful

    For starters, W. will try to put one person forward, the dems will nix them, and W. will appoint in the middle of the next vacation of congress. This person will simply replace gonzales and will ensure that no real investigation occurs until the end of W. time. The dems need to go after after W. AND obtained convictions, then it would make future presidents about doing such actions. But congress, and the dems in particular, have shown that they will allow it to drop. Nixon and reagan were allowed free walks due to the succeeding presidents being republicans. But the next president will almost certainly be a dem. If so, they need to not pardon and allow justice to prevail. Otherwise, we will see that each republican will continue to screw US at will.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    1. Re:Not likely by ucblockhead · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If the Democrats think they'll get the White House next, they don't have much incentive to limit the power of the White House.

      --
      The cake is a pie
    2. Re:Not likely by Rabbit+Time! · · Score: 5, Insightful
      August Pollack has come up with 'The Hillary Rule,' which I think is kind of awesome.

      This is very simple: as a conservative, you are only allowed to defend things like this if you can say- in the same breath- that you have no problem with President Hillary Clinton having the exact same level of power
      Sort of brings home the point that we have limits on power because the person wielding that power is not always on your side of the issues.
    3. Re:Not likely by Leftist+Troll · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's more than just visions of the next term, both parties are dedicated to maintaining a strong Federal government led by a powerful executive. They occasionally bicker about the details, but their fundamental belief in executive power is shared.

    4. Re:Not likely by pluther · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Until then I am not voting, and encourage everyone within earshot not to vote. Maybe when voter turnout gets to be less than 20% they will start to notice.

      So, in other words, the message you're sending them is "Unless you do what I want, I'll just ignore you and let you do whatever you want".

      Yeah, good plan. To express your disapproval of government power-grabbing, you're going to help them grab more.

      --
      If the masses can keep you down, you're not the Ubermensch.
    5. Re:Not likely by sadler121 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Who held Congress for nearly all of the time Clinton was it office? The 90's were so great because no one party held control over any one branch of government. The Dems had the Executive, the Repubs had the Legislature and the Judaical was held by moderates.

      Of course this was how the founding fathers envisioned that the government would work, three equal branches of government would check each other. Instead, in the early part of the 21st century, the three branches of government shifted dramatically to the right and began to collude with each other, instead of checking each other. The result is the fascist government we have had these last (almost) 8 years.

    6. Re:Not likely by hercubus · · Score: 5, Insightful
      this isn't us versus them. _we_ are the problem

      we the American people hired incompetents to run our business. or we abdicated, left the hiring up to the lamers who'll actually stand in line to vote - those dumbfucks don't have anything else better to do??

      we the people used to be in charge but we slacked off. and now who's in charge? assholes. but who hired them? who _let_ them?

      if the American people are ever going to be in charge of their own lives again then we have to wake up, take responsiblity, quit crying like pussies that "someone stole my country" and fucking take it back

      fucking vote! even if it's for Ralph Nader. fucking vote. campaign. volunteer. shoot your mouth off. act like you give a shit! be loud. be proud. be a real patriot. and realize you might have to sacrifice something. do it anyway

      --
      -- How I want a drink, alcoholic of course, after the heavy lectures involving quantum mechanics.
    7. Re:Not likely by Scudsucker · · Score: 3, Insightful

      he 90's were so great because no one party held control over any one branch of government.

      The 90's were great because Clinton stood up the Republicans on bs like the bankruptcy bill and slashing the budget to give tax cuts to the rich. The main issue that the Republican's stood up to Clinton and won was defeating universal health care, which has cost Americans hundreds of billions of dollars for crappy care. Thanks, GOP! Once they had the White House and Congress all bets were off.

      It's also worth mentioning that Clinton was a conservative president: pro death penalty, pro law enfocement, NAFTA, deregulation, COPA, Defense of Marriage Act, etc. He only looks liberal next to today's fascist republicans. To get real political balance you would need to appoint Castro and Chavez and a few family members to the Supreme Court.

    8. Re:Not likely by schneidafunk · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I find it comical to call it military action and not a war. Technically, we are not at war with Iraq but at war with terrorism. In the same manner you can easily say Clinton was at war with drugs. So yes WAS war during Clinton's presidency. In addition, what is defined as 'military action' in America is easily identified as 'war' in other parts of the world.

      --
      Some people die at 25 and aren't buried until 75. -Benjamin Franklin
  8. Hmph. by SatanicPuppy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Lot of liberals aren't happy with it either, and the difference is, they didn't vote it in in the first place. If you voted for the republicans in any of the last 3 elections, you've got to accept responsibility for your choice.

    Don't get me wrong; I don't blame the conservatives. They always vote the same way (well, some vote libertarian). Same with the libs when it's their party who is screwing stuff up; gotta ride that sinking ship right to the bottom. The thing that pisses me off is the damn fickle swing vote. You'd think, since they're not really wedded to an ideology, they'd be better than the right or the left, but really, they're just a bunch of jokers who vote based on whether a candidate has "Presidential Hair" and other such simplistic crap.

    We may blame all the problems on the government, but it's the responsibility of the people to demand good government, and to put good people in power.

    --
    ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
  9. Re:Better late than never by OS24Ever · · Score: 5, Insightful

    He's just one disaster in a string of disasters. It's not going to get any better either because basically what people have elected into office is a huge disaster.

    Until there are term limits on every office, real congressional districts instead of roarshark tests, and a voting populace with a brain you're not going to see much different.

    We've done too good of a job polarizing the two parties. everything they do is boiled down to one issue for that voting block and that is what makes the call. If you're against abortion, you'll vote republican no matter what because the Denmocrats want to open Joe's Abortion Clinic - you rape em we scrape em - on every corner.

    If you're gay, well, you're fucked because neither party will support you 100%. However the democrats will at least wave your direction when you walk by but then turn around and tell the other folks you're just being nice to them because you feel sorry for them.

    If you like guns, you'll vote republican because no matter what they say the Democrats will take away your gun the first chance they get, don't know how to hunt, or many other problems.

    It doesn't matter that the candidate is a closeted gay, child molester, or anything else long as he votes for / against whatever one issue you let decide.

    And I don't think this is a new phenomenon, they've just gotten better at it. No one wants to compromise anymore. It's my way or the highway seems to be the prevailing wind. You see that attitude everywhere from open source vs. closed source to civil unions vs. marriages. We wouldn't know what to do with someone who actually tried to work for a solution instead of standing up top going my way or the highway. The one campaign statement that to this day that infuriates me to know end is that over and over Bush said he was a uniter, not a divider. Post 9/11 he is the perfect example of a divisive president. The entire world was ready to invade Afghanistan and destroy anything that looked at you crosseyed after 9/11 and then next thing you know forget Afghanistan and the real issue, let's go to Iraq.

    I'm not saying Saddam Hussein was some feel good hippie that just got in the way, he killed a good chunk of people and is up there with some of the bigger bad guys in the past. However the path we took really screwed us, but we can't bail out now or our leaving will kill more people than Saddam did in the first place. It's a culture battle at this point and we're too stupid to realize that. Democracy isn't for everyone, and you can't force it on them any more than you can anything else.

    I've gotten to the point where I don't know what we can do. the Democratic party currently isn't offering anything worth looking at as far as the 'front runner' is. By the time my state's primary comes around the decision will already be made for me as to who the candidate is because of our fucked up system of nomination. I truly believe that the primary should be one day, nationwide, in February before the election. It's an IRV ballot where you rank your choices, winner take all. the fact that I believe it is after 'super tuesday' nothing can change the outcome.

    It's not like IA, NH, and SC are really representative of the US Population either. Iowa gives whitebread a new meaning, as does NH. SC starts to represent the mix of ethnicity that makes this nation so great, but the real melting pot states aren't until later and receive less focus than any other state.

    My $0.02 of ranting.

    --

    As a rock-in-roll Physicist once said, No matter where you go, there you are.

  10. Ablative Armor by Phoenix666 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    That's what Karl Rove and Gonzales are trying to be for Bush and Cheney. I wish to god there was someone in the Democratic party with the balls to bring Rove, Gonzales, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, and all the gang to justice. Letting these guys resign and skate away to enjoy the spoils of their crimes is just as deadly to our democracy as the crimes themselves, because our system of checks & balances and faith in the rule of law remain compromised. Impeach, try, and convict. That's the only way to begin to untangle the disaster they've visited on us and the world.

    To those who call themselves Republicans and resist this idea, just imagine Hillary Clinton as president with all the powers Bush and Cheney have arrogated to themselves. It should give you screaming nightmares, because it sure does me.

    --
    Do what you can, with what you have, where you are.
  11. Loyalty more important than competence by humankind · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Gonzales is yet another example how the Bush administration values loyalty over competence. In virtually every executive-appointed office, Bush has installed people who are not qualified to do the job, but are unconditionally loyal to him and his party.

    While this may have always been true, it's never been more true now and this exemplifies the weakness of the American system of government. You elect a president, and then he puts incompetent cronies in positions of huge responsibility in important areas of the government. We've also seen that Bush has no reservations against using loopholes like congressional recess appointments to get around the checks and balances in Congress.

    In other countries like Switzerland, heads of each major area of government, from transportation to defense, are independently, democratically elected. The next time an American starts talking about "democracy", remind them that they need to look elsewhere, far outside of their own country, to find a more true example of the democracy.

    1. Re:Loyalty more important than competence by dpilot · · Score: 5, Insightful

      >installed people who are not qualified to do the job

      What's really fun/annoying about this is the win/win nature of it for the ones who did it.

      They've got their cronies in all of these positions and are tilting the agencies agendas in "loyalist directions" besides. Clearly a WIN.

      On the other hand, if those agencies are called upon to fulfill their primary missions, as understood by the rest of the nation...

      Those filling the positions are not fully competent to do so, and the agency falls down on its job. How is this a WIN? Simple, the folks selecting the appointees also like to say that they're in favor of smaller government, and that anything that can be privatized, should be. If the agency fails in it's job, it's clear evidence that government is incapable, therefore it should be privatized. Of course you're supposed to ignore the fact that their appointees caused the failure in the first place. It becomes a WIN.

      What's truly sad here is the decimation of institutional memory. Some of that may be bad, but not all, and at the very least if the institutional memory is gone, you can't learn from it to improve. The top tier has always been political, but what's happened this time is that the second and third tiers have resigned because they couldn't stomach what the top tier was doing. There's the real problem, the core agency competence has left.

      --
      The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
  12. Re:i didn't think much of ag ag by Dr.+Manhattan · · Score: 3, Insightful

    What, the whole "Screw the Geneva Convention, let's torture people" (PDF file) thing wasn't enough?

    --
    PHEM - party like it's 1997-2003!
  13. Re:... and the Daily Show is off this week. by Carewolf · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Leno, Conan, Letterman, Ferguson

    They are all mere comedians. Find it ironic or not; The Daily Show is the single most factual source of political news and comentary in the US.

  14. Re:The Daily Show and The Colbert Report by Carewolf · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Remember kids, correlation does not imply causation

    And repeating that sentence over and over doesn't mean there is no causation. Correlations are important, because they do imply something significant every now and then.

    In this case the correlation is mostly comical though. So laugh.

  15. Re:How is this News for Nerds? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Because Code is Law.

    Or do you live on a planet where 80% of the world's telecommunications links do not run through the United States of America, where those 80% are not illegally wiretapped, where strong encryption wasn't suppressed under a fifty-year-old munitions law, where the most popular vendor of operating systems software did not secretly include an escrowed backdoor to their encryption engine, where merely fixing broken technology doesn't earn you an indictment and/or a designation as a terrorist, where the US government doesn't kidnap innocent people off the streets of foreign countries, torture them for months, and dump them in countries that will torture and kill them?

    Nerds are still People.

  16. it took you this long? by misanthrope101 · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Before he even took office he was discrediting the Geneva Conventions as "quaint and outdated." He was instrumental in making torture official US policy...oh scratch that, sorry, he was instrumental in necessitating our redefinition of torture so what we were doing wasn't torture anymore. Anyone who was behind him until the Ashcroft/bedside story has been asleep for a few years.

    It's easy to be suspicious when the wind if finally blowing that direction--where were you when this crap started? I knew about Abu Ghraib before I knew about Abu Ghraib, because I've read about the Zimbardo prison experiment. This has been ugly since day one, and I'm not too sympathetic to anyone who gave Gonzalez et al the benefit of the doubt for this many years when they gutted habeus corpus, normalized torture, built secret prisons, etc.

  17. Re:Thank Talking Points Memo. by Nimey · · Score: 3, Insightful

    They were fired because they wouldn't abuse their offices for the President's political gain.

    You make me sick.

    --
    Hail Eris, full of mischief...

    E pluribus sanguinem
  18. Obligatory Douglas Adams by SatanicPuppy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "It comes from a very ancient democracy, you see..."

    "You mean, it comes from a world of lizards?"

    "No," said Ford, who by this time was a little more rational and coherent than he had been, having finally had the coffee forced down him, "nothing so simple. Nothing anything like to straightforward. On its world, the people are people. The leaders are lizards. The people hate the lizards and the lizards rule the people."

    "Odd," said Arthur, "I thought you said it was a democracy."

    "I did," said ford. "It is."

    "So," said Arthur, hoping he wasn't sounding ridiculously obtuse, "why don't the people get rid of the lizards?"

    "It honestly doesn't occur to them," said Ford. "They've all got the vote, so they all pretty much assume that the government they've voted in more or less approximates to the government they want."

    "You mean they actually vote for the lizards?"

    "Oh yes," said Ford with a shrug, "of course."

    "But," said Arthur, going for the big one again, "why?"

    "Because if they didn't vote for a lizard," said Ford, "the wrong lizard might get in. Got any gin?"

    --Douglas Adams, So long, and thanks for all the fish.

    --
    ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
  19. Strategic Resignation by glassware · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Congress has only barely worked up the will to investigate these misdeeds, and I am saddened to realize that Alberto Gonzales' resignation will completely end somehow push everyone to "move on." If ever there was an administration that deserved to be hounded until the end of its days, it would be this one - but they are practicing strategic resignations. Every time there is a lull in an investigation, the official under fire resigns, to be replaced by an equally inept and loyal official who simply isn't under investigation yet. The fact that the obvious target of hatred is gone saps the will of the investigators, and everyone involved gets away with no jail time and no penalties.

  20. An old sentiment by MythoBeast · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Federalists passed something called the "Alien and Sedition Act" in 1798 which allowed prosecution of anyone who said bad things about the current government. This particular governmental power was hastily repealed in 1802 when it became likely that Thomas Jefferson (a staunch opponent of the act and those who passed it) would win the next presidency.

    Politics is like football. We've been at it so long that we forget that fitness was the original purpose of the game, and just care about winning.

    --
    Wake up - the future is arriving faster than you think.