Quote:
|
Originally Posted by aceventura3
My answer is that for the most part Bush is honest and is doing the best he can. That he has made some mistakes but has tried to fix them. That if he did step over the line, it was with the intent to protect American lives.
|
Intent is only part of what's going on though. If you break the law with the best intentions, you've still broken the law. Though I've seen no evidence to suggest that Bush, Cheney, Condy, etc. have any good intentions towards the American people, it would stand as irrelevant. The wiretaps, for whatever reason they were done, were done.
I guess my question would be: what makes you think that Bush is honest or is doing his best for the good of the US? So far, every move he's made has weakened us in some way. From his months of vacations pre-9/11 to Afghanistan, everything has been a fiasco, and it's all been detrimental to the US.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by aceventura3
If you, most Democrats, those on the left, the Bush haters, truly believe what you say you believe and let Bush get away with "it", what does that say?
|
The general populace of the US does not have the ability to have a vote of no confidence. We live in a constitutional republic, and must follow those rules. We need to pressure our representative, and many of them are cowards. I've written to Kucinish and thanked him for his work.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by aceventura3
Here is another question. If Koppel truly believes in a total separation between performance and serving a partisan agenda how can he support any political appointments at DOJ? For example if the next President wins based on a party platform of going after employers who hire illegal immigrants (partisan agenda), and you have people at DOJ not willing to act on that agenda, doesn't the President have a right to fire those people based on their lack of performance relative to the agenda?
|
The DOJ has to follow the letter of the law. If the law doesn't support the president, then the president has to appeal to the senate to enact new laws for the DOJ to follow. If the laws already exist and the DOJ refuses to follow them, he can easily dismiss them for simply not following the law.