As I think of the posts I have made on this site alone (not to mention the other sites I frequent), to say that I am not a big fan of George Bush is probably a gross understatement.
Now, having said that, I can’t take it any longer. I have to stick up for him.
Is he the smartest President ever? I don’t think anyone would make that claim.
Is he the smooth, savvy, people person that Clinton was? Of course not.
Is he a man of principle? I can only answer with a resounding yes.
He has had chance after chance to sling mud back in the face of his detractors, yet he has chosen the high road. This has not made his life any easier. This has not made him any more beloved by the American or international public or media. Yet he stands by his convictions without making excuses.
I could talk about the war in Iraq, or the “War on Terror”, the obvious hypocrisy of the Democrats in power in the Valerie Plame case that Bush could EASILY capitalize on, the fact that Bush waited until AFTER the Congressional elections to ask for Rumsfeld’s resignation, or any number of other topics. The one that has my panties in a bunch this evening, however, is the dismissal of eight U.S. attorneys and the painful, downright criminal bias in American main stream media (MSM).
I admit, my initial reaction to the dismissal of these eight U.S. attorneys was to shake my head in disbelief that G.W. was, once again, acting the fool.
My initial reaction to the conservative retorts that mentioned Clinton’s plenary purging of the U.S. attorneys was – BS!
Since my initial reaction, I have read article after article online and in the print media regarding the (mis)handling of these firings.
The following quote sums up the obvious bias in the MSM quite nicely:
“The Senate, meanwhile, voted to strip Gonzales of his authority to fill U.S. attorney vacancies without Senate confirmation. Democrats contend the Justice Department and White House purged eight federal prosecutors, some of whom were leading political corruption investigations, after a change in the Patriot Act gave Gonzales the new authority.” – Quoted from an AP article on Breitbart.com (http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8O06EU80&show_article=1)
Let us examine this deliberate misrepresentation of the facts:
(1) The Senate, meanwhile, voted to STRIP Gonzales of his authority to fill U.S. attorney vacancies without Senate confirmation.
GOOD FOR THEM! Let us, however, consider the fact that it was CONGRESS that didn’t bother to read the Patriot Act of 2005 before passing it into law, thereby granting Gonzales these powers. Congress righted a wrong that they committed. This is, in no way, indicative of any wrongdoing on G.W.’s or Gonzales’ part. At worst, it is proof positive that the Republican Congress slipped a rider into a bill with evil intentions. While I wouldn’t waste my breath defending the Republican-controlled Congress of the last several years, neither would I expect them to want to grant wholesale powers to any future, possibly Democratic, White House.
(2) “Democrats contend the Justice Department and White House “purged” eight federal prosecutors…”
Of the fourteen definitions of “purge” on dictionary.com, the most relevant (and innocuous) would be:
13. the removal or elimination of members of a political organization, government, nation, etc., who are considered disloyal or otherwise undesirable.
I agree wholeheartedly that U.S. attorneys should NOT be partisan lap-dogs. However, this definition of purging (which is the most accurate in the quoted context) clearly supports the assertion that these dismissals are NOT, IN THE SLIGHTEST, any different from the “purge” that Bush Sr. or “Slick Willie” directed at the commencement of their terms in office.
Once again, while I would expect our U.S. attorneys to be above partisanship while upholding and enforcing the law, what company have you ever worked for, in which you serve solely at the pleasure of your employer (as is the case of U.S. attorneys), were you not expected to exhibit the characteristics of a “company man/woman” and expected to “toe the party line”. Business is business and, as sad as it makes me, government is no different.
(3) “…some of whom were leading political corruption investigations…”
Again, a deliberate attempt to mislead the reader into believing these U.S. Attorneys were dismissed because they were investigating Republicans. “Some of the political corruption investigations” include investigations of Democrats.
(4) “…after a change in the Patriot Act gave Gonzales the new authority.”
This particular bit, above all else, is what has me at my wit’s end.
Let’s look at the entire quote as stated:
“The Senate, meanwhile, voted to strip Gonzales of his authority to fill U.S. attorney vacancies without Senate confirmation. Democrats contend the Justice Department and White House purged eight federal prosecutors, some of whom were leading political corruption investigations, after a change in the Patriot Act gave Gonzales the new authority.”
The way it is stated, it DELIBERATELY leads readers to believe that Gonzales, prior to this change in the Patriot Act, did not have the power to summarily dismiss U.S. Attorneys.
WRONG, WRONG, WRONG, WRONG…and even worse…a deliberate and irresponsible misrepresentation of the facts.
This is how it SHOULD read:
“The Senate, meanwhile, voted to strip Gonzales of his authority to fill U.S. attorney vacancies without Senate confirmation…after a change in the Patriot Act gave Gonzales the new authority.”
The change in the Patriot Act of 2005 granted the Executive-branch the power to appoint U.S. Attorneys without Congressional oversight (the Executive-branch has had the legal right to dismiss U.S. Attorneys at their leisure since, at least, Myers v. United States [1926]). This was an injustice. This was the fault of Congress; whomever slipped the riders into the Patriot Act of 2005 and whomever did not bother to read the god-forsaken thing before passing it into law.
If you would like, I can post numerous articles which exhibit similar bias.
I am a news junky. If I go a day without reading the news online or in print, I can’t stand it. This consistent and downright criminal bias in the MSM is slowly, but surely (I know, I know…don’t call you surely…), destroying what little faith I had left in the news media.