George “The Decider” Wallace standing in front of the door to the Foster Auditorium because, like George “The Decider” Bush, Wallace had:
1. A massive, corrupt and morally degenerate empire to defend.
2. An open and truly Imperial contempt for the rule of law and the rights of others.
3. A large Base of squealing pig people who would loudly support any crazy-ass shit he did. In fact the more barbaric, disgraceful and un-American he acted, the louder they cheered.
This via HuffPo
White House offers to let Congress interview aides on firings; Democrats call it 'meaningless'
LAURIE KELLMAN | AP | March 20, 2007 05:00 PM EST
WASHINGTON — The White House pushed back Tuesday against Democrats demanding answers on the firings of federal prosecutors, refusing to allow President Bush's top aides to testify publicly and under oath about their roles in the dismissals.
Bush gave his embattled attorney general, Alberto Gonzales, a boost during an early morning call to his longtime friend and planned to end the day with a public statement in support of him.
Several Democrats, including presidential hopefuls Hillary Rodham Clinton, Barrack Obama, Joe Biden and John Edwards, have called for Gonzales' resignation. So have a handful of Republican lawmakers.
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.
"What happened in this case sends a signal really through intimidation by purge: 'Don't quarrel with us any longer,'" said Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., a former U.S. attorney who spent much of Monday evening paging through 3,000 documents released by the Justice Department.
White House Counsel Fred Fielding told lawmakers they could interview presidential counselor Karl Rove, former White House Counsel Harriet Miers and their deputies _ but only on the president's terms: in private, "without the need for an oath" and without a transcript.
…
The White House offered to arrange interviews with Rove, Miers, deputy White House counsel William Kelley and J. Scott Jennings, a deputy to White House political director Sara Taylor, who works for Rove.
"Such interviews would be private and conducted without the need for an oath, transcript, subsequent testimony or the subsequent issuance of subpoenas," Fielding said in his letter.
…
Fuck you.
Nixon tried exactly this shit with the Watergate tapes. Hanging onto them like grim death, and issuing his own, redacted, abridged “Archie and Jughead” version of the transcripts. Trying to dictate terms like a pasha, while swearing that he was being more than fair.
However if six years of Republican rule has taught the non-lobotomized citizens of this country anything it is this: Unless you put them under oath with a jail term pointed right at their heads, Republicans will look you straight in eye and lie and lie and lie.
Without conscience.
Without remorse.
Without hesitation.
Without breaking a sweat.
And they will lie about anything.
A lie, a broken law, an illegal war, a government staffed with hacks and imbeciles, a lost city or two…all just means to their ultimate end of a perfect, government-free Corporate feudal state. That is their Godhead, and in the pursuit of that ideal all things – all villainies, all slaughter, all vivisections of American values and law – are permitted.
Just like his little behind-closed-doors-not-under-oath-with-no-transcript- while-sitting-on-Unca-Dick’s-lap “talk” to Congress about his complete failure on 9/11, Bush is doing nothing less than standing in the nation's schoolhouse door and baring his blood-tinged fangs at the citizens and Constitution of the United States.
Sorry, Boss Hogg, but your GOP already set the bar for how aggressively Presidential Administrations are to be treated whenever there is the slightest whiff of anything untoward -- no matter how trivial. Your crimes are a millions miles higher than anything that went on during the Age of the Big Dog and yet, by Clinton-era standards, you’re gotten nothing but the kid-glove, mint-on-the-pillow, happy-ending treatment.
So now your sleazy sycophants get to suck on it.
Administration officials can, of course, choose to do what they have done for the last six years; flagrantly defy the law and the will of the American people in furtherance of their own corrupt and criminal schemes.
Of course, if they choose do so in this instance, the 101st Airborne should be sent in to pry their snouts out of the Koolaid Troughs long enough to drag them by their wattles for a hot squat in front of Congress.
Sure the tear gas might be showy,
But sometimes a little theater is justice’s best handmaiden.
14 comments:
"Pig people?"
Oh, c'mon, the Tellarites have nothing to do with this! :)
Live long and prosper, IBW
The 101st did take on Wallace, but I think the 82nd's mission might fit better:
82nd Airborne Division Mission:
Within 18 hours of notification, the 82nd Airborne Division strategically deploys, conducts forcible entry parachute assault and secures key objectives for follow-on military operations in support of U.S. national interests.
Run, Karl, run...
After all these many years, it's finally crystallized in my mind, and I've seen the picture of that evil little man in the doorway so often it's like a family photo, but now it makes sense. What was it Buckley said? "A Conservative is someone standing astride the Tide of History shouting,'STOP!!'?"
Forget Buckley and Fuck Nixon, Goldwater and House Bush, too. It seems we finally have Patient Zero for the, Rovus Morbili Americanus Bushii, conservative/fucktard bacilli...
Wallace.
without the need for an oath...without the need for an oath
leigh
Drifty,
Unfortunately, the 101st (or 82nd, for that matter) is under the authority of the executive branch. So is the DoJ, who would be the ones to enforce the "accountability" for defying a Congressional subpeona. Bush thinks he has his ringers all in place to keep Congress safely at arm's length. Congress can squeal all it wants, but it all will signify nothing.
Congressional Republicans who might be far-sighted enough to perceive a Democratic president in their futures might awaken from their drooling stupor enough to realize that they're going to have to throw Bush under the bus if they're going to have any chance of making the next Democratic president's life at all miserable. If they let this slide, the Democrats following Bush will see no compunction to using the full power of the executive to sideline Congress permanently (under the rule that absolute power corrupts absolutely). Of course, this assumes there is such a thing as a thinking Republican.
With AG and Bush stacking the Federal courts, the window of opportunity is about to slam.
Ah, the happy feely George, "I was outniggered, and I will never be outniggered again!" Wallace. Rot in hell.
As to the whole question as to whether Abu Gonzo will pervert justice and ignore the subpoenas, well, of course he'll try. Somebody made a comment elsewhere that our founding fathers weren't stupid. The Congress apparently has the power, should its subpoenas be ignored, to send round the Sergeant at Arms to collect the rogue in question, most likely accompanied by a phalanx of Capitol City Police.
You want a pissing match? Okay, you've got one.
I need my right hand to hold the pen but I'd give my left to write like you.
Sadly, I have this sinking feeling that this is gonna be 27th verse same as the 1st as Bush et al skate on down the frozen potomac, middle fingers flying high.
31 of Clinton’s advisors in the 1990’s testified in front of Congress. In this adminstration so far: 1. Three others refused invitations. Where are all the conservatives now wailing b-b-b-but Clinton!
Let Preznit Smirky stamp and cry and draw a line in the sand all he wants. It didn’t work for Nixon and it didn’t work for b-b-b-but Clinton either. All it will do is delay the inevitable and piss off the two-thirds of the country who think he’s a bad president with something to hide.
After all this crap, a co-worker responded to some lunch time discussion by calling Clinton a liar. It was entertaining to see his face collapse when I bellowed at him that I refused to here that crap anymore--not after the last 7 years. There was no argument whatever from the largely hogamus gathering. Could be my size; could be a touch of shame. I'll go for the shame.
After all this crap, a co-worker responded to some lunch time discussion by calling Clinton a liar. It was entertaining to see his face collapse when I bellowed at him that I refused to here that crap anymore--not after the last 7 years. There was no argument whatever from the largely hogamus gathering. Could be my size; could be a touch of shame. I'll go for the shame.
And they will lie about anything.
And how. You know their lying is pathological because they lie even when they don't need to. They lie -- "I never said that" -- even when you show them the videotape of them saying it. There is no depth to which they will not sink.
I think it goes back much farther than Wallace. I'd go back to the grim fact that for centuries, the English were not strong enough to conquer the Scots once and for all, and the Scots were not strong enough to expel the English once and for all. This meant centuries of feudal anarchy in the English/Scots border regions, retarding the social and moral development of the unfortunate folks who were stuck living there.
I'd add to that the British policy of using the colonies as a dumping ground for criminals, misfits, religious and political malcontents, and the just plain unlucky. [As I am a white Southerner, I may be describing some of my ancestors here. :)]
Then, I'd add the deep and lingering bitterness of a warrior culture that suffered a huge military defeat, largely because of the ineptitude of its political and some of its military leaders [not all Southern generals were of Lee's caliber, you know]. The Southern ruling class knew they had to deflect the blame from themselves, so they fed their common folk a rich brew of toxic historical mythology. [This may be the only case in history in which the losers were permitted to write the history books.] The Northern ruling class let them do it because all they cared about was keeping the Southern planters in the Union so they couldn't default on their debts. Also, they were beginning to think of their Southern counterparts as allies in the struggle against the working classes.
All of this led to Wallace and his successors. The GOP could not shake off the heritage of Democratic success [the New Deal, the victory over fascism] until they lowered themselves to tap this rich vein of resentment. :(
The Northern ruling class let them do it because all they cared about was keeping the Southern planters in the Union so they couldn't default on their debts.
It also helped that the Dixie revisionists had the considerable if misguided talents of D.W. Griffith (Birth of a Natoin) and Margaret Mitchell (Gone With The Wind; and you have to admit that the opening theme to that movie is right up there with that of Star Wars) on their side.
Post a Comment