Dems Tricked Into Wasting Leadership Over Gonzales

Alberto Gonzales states his case pretty clearly a WaPo op/ed today:

To be clear: I directed my then-deputy chief of staff, Kyle Sampson, to initiate this [performance review] process; fully knew that it was occurring; and approved the final recommendations. Sampson periodically updated me on the review. As I recall, his updates were brief, relatively few in number and focused primarily on the review process.

During those conversations, to my knowledge, I did not make decisions about who should or should not be asked to resign.

I've heard many, including Conservatives, call for Gonzales' head. I can see why the Left would: They will attack anything connected to Bush, and if their target happens to be black or brown, they will attack harder still. Why a Conservative would call for Gonzales' resignation; that I can't figure out.

Are we supposed to roll over and expose our underbelly every time the Dems manufacture a crisis? A crisis is not missing emails or confused recollections; a crisis in this case would be using the people's infrastructure for private gain. The Dems have made a weak, circumstantial case for that in New Mexico, but that's it.

Justice under Gonzalez is not what Defense under Rumsfeld came to be. The Department is functioning well, cases are being investigated and prosecuted. The review, I truly believe, was designed to make it run better. You can't have 93 political apppointees running 93 offices and expect each of them to be running well. In fact, the 80/20 rule tells us that 18 or 19 of the U.S. Attorneys probably needed replacing; 9 were.

Faced with Gonzales' op/ed, which as I said is pretty clear and straightforward, the Left reponds like this:

Alberto Gonzales pens the most intellectually insulting editorial in the history of the English language. Perhaps the second most annoying thing about the Bush administration (after their unquenchable lust for human blood) is their refusal to fire people promptly for being ***holes. Read it and then express your outrage. I cannot believe this guy is planning on testifying before Congress on Tuesday as a current employee of the U.S. Government, and that he expects his perjury and obstruction of justice will somehow save his job.

This is like G. Gordon Liddy testifying before the Watergate committees and expecting to keep his job as a plumber...on the public payroll. It's impossible to think of a greater insult that could possibly be perpetrated on the American public.

Resign already, before we have to put you in chains. (Booman Tribune)

Is there a point argued, a fact established, a statement rebutted anywhere in there? No, it's just some hyperbole to pump up the self-righteousness, and its chock full of laughable inconsistency and hypocrisy:

• If the second most annoying thing about the Bush Admin. is not firing people, then why all the huff and puff about them firing people?
  
  
• Could anything about this minor tempest in a teapot rise to "the most" anything in the English language?

Booman and his hysterical ilk have been threatening chains for quite some time now. The Plame Game was supposed to bring down Rove and Cheney, but it did not. The people were supposed to rise up to impeach Bush, but have not.

He and his friends can rattle their chains, but they're neither credible or particularly attention-getting. In fact, rattle louder, rattle on! Only the Dem Congress is listening, and it's causing them to waste their newfound power on vindictive witch-hunts. They could be showing leadership and creating a threat to the eventual GOP resurgence, but instead, they're acting like Booman; all smoke, no substance.