Comments on: Clean The Stables

By: C.S.Strowbridge

C.S.Strowbridge — Thu, 21 Jun 2007 02:47:25 +0000

“Is it possible to be a Republican and a good American? No, it is not.”

Yes it is, but you would be called a RINO today.

You need to be fiscally responsible while detesting government interference in personal lives. Using military force would be an option only if diplomacy failed not a rallying point for the base.

I’m sure people could add more to that list.

By: Mike

Mike — Thu, 21 Jun 2007 02:12:44 +0000

Is it possible to be a Republican and a good American? No, it is not.

By: C.S.Strowbridge

C.S.Strowbridge — Wed, 20 Jun 2007 02:09:23 +0000

“Did you know that about 80% of the US ambassadors were major campaign contributors?”

Yeah, and 80% of ambassadors have no real function other than to throw the occasional cocktail party.

On the other hand, the head of FEMA is a real position where a lack of competence can have real consequences.

By: moron

moron — Wed, 20 Jun 2007 01:22:47 +0000

But will the next Democratic president have the balls (or the ovaries, or what have you) to do it?

I wish I had your optimism, Oliver.

When Bill Clinton was inaugurated in 1992, he decided to make nice and keep most of the GOP hacks in place — he thought if he could just make nice with Louis Freeh and the repug joint chiefs, etc etc, that they’d respond in kind.

We all saw how well that worked out.

And by all indications, Hillary is just as much of a pathetic GOP doormat as her husband.

By: Lysander Spooner II

Lysander Spooner II — Wed, 20 Jun 2007 00:15:30 +0000

Scott, that’s the opinion that generated the link. Where have you been?

By: Nimrod Gently

Nimrod Gently — Tue, 19 Jun 2007 22:10:05 +0000

At least don’t drag Elizabeth Smart into this.

By: Duros62

Duros62 — Tue, 19 Jun 2007 21:48:32 +0000

That’s an opinion, Frank, not evidence.
Seriously, that bullshit reflux disease is gonna rot your esophagus.

By: Lysander Spooner II

Lysander Spooner II — Tue, 19 Jun 2007 21:28:32 +0000

Grand Central: I counter your evidence with mine, from the originating link:

For example, Bush’s politicization of the career staff in Justice and elsewhere was a very bad thing, no? And certainly this kind of thing has to stop, no? So we will forbid the new Democratic President to interfere with career personnel, with the result that all of the political hacks Bush put in civil service positions will be untouchable.

Now, could we ditch the Hatch Act nonsense, and get back to the point?

By: Station

Station — Tue, 19 Jun 2007 20:19:23 +0000

“It isn’t because you say it is”

No, but…it clearly is, though. There really isn’t anything else to say. You’re simply wrong.

By: Lysander Spooner II

Lysander Spooner II — Tue, 19 Jun 2007 18:51:40 +0000

Did it or did it not apply to the employees in question? I don’t care about Lurita Doan.
There are people you just can’t fire.

By: locus

locus — Tue, 19 Jun 2007 18:37:09 +0000

Let’s try this again, Lysander. The Hatch Act doesn’t only apply to Civil Service Employees, but also to certain political appointees unless granted an exemption under Section 7324.

This is the reason why the U.S. Office of Special Counsel cited Lurita Doan for violating the Hatch Act when she took part in a video conference with Karl Rove and other White House officials, and sent letters asking how to help Republican politicians get elected. The head of the GSA is a political appointee.

By: Duros62

Duros62 — Tue, 19 Jun 2007 18:12:49 +0000

Nothing, Frank? No rejoinder? so sad.

By: Duros62

Duros62 — Tue, 19 Jun 2007 18:12:01 +0000

To be fair, Michael Brown was way more qualified to be an ambassador than the head of emergency management.

By: Duros62

Duros62 — Tue, 19 Jun 2007 17:56:51 +0000

How about this? From Nimrod’s link.

* Most of the Americans sent to staff the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) had no technical or professional training or experience in the work to which they were assigned. Rather, they were chosen because they were Republican Party loyalists.

By: Lysander Spooner II

Lysander Spooner II — Tue, 19 Jun 2007 17:52:36 +0000

Wait a minute! A politically motivated appointee!

O my stars!

Did you know that about 80% of the US ambassadors were major campaign contributors?

No matter which party won the White House?

You are all failing to distinguish between political appointees — a tried and true tradition in American politics; and people using political power to accomplish illegal and / or unethical things.

By: Duros62

Duros62 — Tue, 19 Jun 2007 17:25:50 +0000

*supporter*

By: Duros62

Duros62 — Tue, 19 Jun 2007 17:25:19 +0000

That may be a violation of Election law, Clem, but that is not the same as using “government agencies for partisan political goals”.

Jeesum Crikey, Frank. The head of FEMA had no past experience in emergency management. None. Zero. NAAAAAADA. But he was a friend and support of the Bushes and the GOP. You connect the dots. Does your man-crush on the GOP extend that far you can’t even acknowledge shit like that?

By: Duros62

Duros62 — Tue, 19 Jun 2007 17:18:47 +0000

I like that piece, Nimrod. Especially liked this bit:

* To this day Bush says in his speeches that Saddam did not comply with the UN, that Saddam kicked the inspectors out of Iraq, and that Bush had Security Council authorization to invade. None of those statements are true.

By: Lysander Spooner II

Lysander Spooner II — Tue, 19 Jun 2007 16:58:51 +0000

Grand Central: It isn’t because you say it is. If that’s the case, then I say, “It isn’t. It clearly isn’t.”

By: Station

Station — Tue, 19 Jun 2007 15:27:38 +0000

“That may be a violation of Election law, Clem, but that is not the same as using “government agencies for partisan political goals”.”

Er, yes. Yes, it is. It clearly is.