Quote:
|
Originally Posted by willravel
UsTwo is like DK. When they say socialist, what they mean is authoritarian. They don't understand the difference.
Host, who are you voting for? I'm honestly curious.
|
...Edwards offers only a glimmer of hope....I'm starting to feel about democrats, as you do.....about the democrats....
earlier.....I read this...
Quote:
http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/004506.php
....Bradbury, however, shouldn't have been in his job, at least not this year. A 1998 law called the Vacancies Reform Act bars non-Senate-confirmed appointees for holding their jobs for longer than 210 days. Durbin, Kennedy and Feingold wrote to Bush this week to note Bradbury's "apparent violation" of the statute, and asked Bush to offer up a new nominee as OLC chief. You can read that letter here.
Whether that happens is the next big legal test for the Bush administration in the war on terrorism. Bradbury received crucial support yesterday from Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA), the top Republican on the judiciary committee. Mukasey showed no inclination to urge Bush to throw Bradbury overboard. Even if he ultimately recommends that a new OLC chief should be appointed, it's ultimately Bush's call. Given how precious the OLC's blessing is to the White House on crucial counterterrorism programs, it's clear that what happens with Bradbury will reveal a lot about Bush's intentions as he heads into his final year in office.
|
...so I posted this feedbacK:
Quote:
Why does TPM Muckraker report, essemtially the same story, over and over....why not instead, tell us whether the last "letter" received any response?
"Senators: Justice Department's Chief Counsel Breaking the Law
By Paul Kiel - July 19, 2007, 4:24PM
Nothing surprises me any more.
Four Democratic senators wrote Alberto Gonzales today to inquire whether Stephen Bradbury, the apparent acting head of the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel, was illegally carrying out his duties.
Bradbury was nominated for the top spot at OLC last year, but the Senate Judiciary Committee returned his nomination to the president, refusing to hear it until Bradbury's role in approving the National Security Agency's surveillance program became clear. The President shut down an internal Justice Department investigation of the matter last year by taking the unprecedented and unexplained step of denying security clearances to investigators from the Office of Professional Responsibility. "
|
So sick of reading "Ground Hog Day"....BS....neutered effing democrats....or cluelessness like Senate Banking Chair, Dodd's.....
...I'm starting to wonder if there is no one to vote for...because the wealthy elite own everyone who announces their candidacy......am I being paranoid?