WASHINGTON (AP) — Republican support for Attorney General Alberto Gonzales eroded Sunday as three key senators sharply questioned his truthfulness and a Democrat joined the list of lawmakers who want him to resign over the firing of eight federal prosecutors.”We have to have an attorney general who is candid and truthful. And if we find out he’s not been candid and truthful, that’s a very compelling reason for him not to stay on,” said Sen. Arlen Specter, the top Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, which oversees the Justice Department.Specter, R-Pennsylvania, said he would wait until Gonzales’ scheduled April 17 testimony to the committee on the dismissals before deciding whether he could continue to support the attorney general. He called it a “make or break” appearance.To Sen. Chuck Hagel, R-Nebraska, Gonzales “does have a credibility problem. … We govern with one currency, and that’s trust. And that trust is all important. And when you lose or debase that currency, then you can’t govern. And I think he’s going to have some difficulties.”
To think how close we came to this person being on the Supreme Court staggers me. This whole story is steeped in lies and deception, and we almost had him for the rest of his life.
reason,
Correlation does not imply causation.
The fact that corporations, lobbyists, and folks with money have ready access to politicians does not prove that the politicians or their parties are “corrupt.”
I think a lot of folks use this as an excuse not to become involved. We elect our representatives and I would lay ofdds that you would be pleasantly surprised at how responsive they would be if you took the time to interact with them and share your concerns!
Boise,
Hmmmm, looks like you’re having trouble answering a few basic questions…
tim i vote and when i wrote my senator to express my dismay at the border problem and the stalemate in iraq i got zero response and no i was not angry or disrespectful in my e-mail.stop kidding yourself our leaders only care about the top 4% of the people.this is not what the founders risked their lives for, if so we might as well remained in the british empire.
?
You never asked me a question. That’s probably why I didn’t have a response.
I was responding to your criticism of me not loving my country and people like me being the ‘enemy within’ (in your words).
reason-
Yeah, they only care about the top 4% (I assume you were talking about the big money people), PLUS the evangelicals. Everyone else can just go to hell in their eyes.
Boise,
Sorry, my bad. I was not being specific enough. I was referring to my questions about the Plame affair even though I didn’t ask you directly.
No problem.
yes boise i was talking about the big money people as for the evanglicals they are being played.secular conservatives like me no longer have a voice in the major parties.eisenhower and goldwater would puke if they could see who is claiming to be conservative.
Shithead said: [Ahhh...at least someone is thinking...
It has absolutely nothing to do with atheism...but what does that matter?
Regardless of the disclaimer this site is definately pro-democrat.
Simply review the topics posted and you'll find that they are overwhelmingly anti-republican. As I noted last month AA was silent on the fact that 2 Dems actually preached their message from the pulpit...and for some reason, Dave believes in the myth that the Dems are somehow more friendly to their cause of enforcing Sep of Church and State...]
Hey that was a rather intelligent point you’ve made, dumbass. You almost impressed me.
No matter what the Dems do, they would have to put intentional effort (and work really hard) into doing worse than the GOP. A chimp could do better than shrub; a real shrub could do better than shrub!
Phreedm Is A Dumbass, I agree with most of your comments and enjoy reading them.
However, in your last comment it seemed like you might be suggesting that the republicans and democrats are equally for religion and against having a government that is not entangled in religion. While I would agree that the democrates aren’t enforcing the wall between religion and state as it should be, that is different from inviting religion to lead the nation the way the republicans are.
Perhaps I’ve missed some of the intended meaning because you apparently were quoting “Shithead” and I might have misunderstood as I don’t read those comments.
cry4turtles wrote:
I think it is possible to demonstrate that as a true statement.