Gonzales. WTF?
As much as I hate to, I'll echo John Edwards: Better late than never. Alberto Gonzales was in over his head from day one as AG. Say what you will about John Ashcroft, but at least he was qualified for the job. Gonzales' list of qualification was strictly limited to two factors:
- He was Hispanic
- He was a Bush loyalist
Like so many Bush Administration scandals, this one was totally unnecessary. The (non-)event that precipitated his fall from grace was the firing of the U.S. Attorneys. Had Gonzales merely responded to early criticisms with "I fired them because I felt like it," he'd still have his job. Instead, we were treated to an array of shifting and mutually contradictory reasons and excuses. He was trapped in lies of his own making.
Still, I'm glad to see him go. Incompetence aside, he was probably the worst Attorney General of my lifetime, and I lived through Janet Reno. Gonzales' tenure at Justice saw zealous prosecution of pornography during a time when terrorists were (are) actively trying to blow us up, as well as the wanton denial of Second Amendment rights for law-abiding citizens simply on Gonzales' say-so.
But isn't the whole thing just totally emblematic how Bush handles things? He stood by the guy for months on end, taking black eyes, bloody noses, and even broken limbs. Then, once all the damage has been done, irreversibly, then he decides to fire the guy? Christ, what is it with this guy? Even when he does the right thing, he does it so late in the game that it often comes to naught. The troop surge in Iraq is great and all, but can you imagine what might have been achieved had he done it three years ago when it might have actually made a difference? Grrrrr....
Comments
It's called loyalty. And it's a virtue with people we do not see often, definitely not politics (I remember when Joceyln Elders got the boot because of her comment on masturbation. Geez!).
That or as we say in the south, "hardheadedness".
Who would you like to be the next AG?
Posted by: Rachel | August 27, 2007 08:00 PM
And at lest you give why you're glad he's gone instead of just "Bush loyalist" - not to antagonize, but aren't most high profile jobs like Gonzales' require such loyalty? Powell immediately comes to mind.
Posted by: Rachel | August 27, 2007 08:09 PM
"Had Gonzales merely responded to early criticisms with "I fired them because I felt like it," he'd still have his job." (BNJ)
Absolutely, the U.S. Attorneys serve at the pleasure of the Executive branch, there was no need for further explanation.
"Incompetence aside, he was probably the worst Attorney General of my lifetime, and I lived through Janet Reno. Gonzales' tenure at Justice saw zealous prosecution of pornography during a time when terrorists were (are) actively trying to blow us up, as well as the wanton denial of Second Amendment rights for law-abiding citizens simply on Gonzales' say-so." (BNJ)
Though I probably consider Reno the worst in my lifetime, Gonzalez was thrust into a situation that certainly seemed over his head.
We need an AG who can articulate exactly WHY terrorism is NOT a "crime," and suspected terrorists are NOT "criminals," but "enemy combatants" engaged in unconventional warfare.
As former Director of the FBI's NY Office so rightly said, "America's criminal justice system is inadequate to dealing with international terrorism."
Suspected terrorists do deserve the right to be heard and to defend themselves....in secret military tribunals, NOT a U.S. Criminal Court.
Thay are NOT mere "criminals."
Posted by: JMK | August 27, 2007 08:30 PM
Rachel, I guess my problem is not so much that Gonzales was a loyalist, but rather that his loyalty was his only (or at least his primary) qualification for the job. Hell, if loyalty were all that mattered, Sean Hannity could be AG.
Posted by: BNJ | August 27, 2007 09:13 PM
Hell, if loyalty were all that mattered, Sean Hannity could be AG.
You got a point there.
Hannity? (gulps)
Posted by: Rachel | August 27, 2007 09:46 PM
This is more to JMK *and* Barry, but wasn't Ashcroft prosecuted as AG for trying pushing against terrorism the way you describe? if that is the case, than no one can win, because one's either seen as too hard or too soft.
Posted by: Rachel | August 27, 2007 09:53 PM
Good stuff indeed...
Posted by: Butch | August 27, 2007 10:05 PM
The troop surge in Iraq is great and all, but can you imagine what might have been achieved had he done it three years ago when it might have actually made a difference?
Barry,
Welcome back. However, I have to say that your vacation was too short. Your judgment is worse than ever! The surge can not work and COULD not have worked at any time. Going into Iraq was a disastrous error! That's reality.
Posted by: Blue Wind | August 27, 2007 10:07 PM
Hi Rachel,
I believe Ashcroft was assailed as AG for a number of things, though even he didn't adequately explain why terrorism isn't a "crime" and CAN'T be treated as one.
When a senior and very well respected law enforcement officer, like James Fox (former Director of the FBI's NY Office) acknowledges that international terrorism can't be dealt with by America's criminal justice system, there's not much else that needs to be said on that score.
Posted by: JMK | August 27, 2007 10:22 PM
Reno was slightly worse than Gonzo only because her decisions caused unneeded loss of life (Waco) and a loss of face to Cuba (Elian Gonzalez).
My biggest complaint about Alberto was his intransigence in pursuing a lie detector test for Sandy Berger which happened to be a part of his plea deal.
Glad to see BW hasn't lost his magic touch by posting in the wrong thread.
Welcome back, Barry!
Posted by: mal | August 27, 2007 11:34 PM
I cannot tell you how annoyed I am over how W is placing AG's resignations squarely on the heads of partisan hacks. No. It was because, as has happened so often in politics (and not just this Administration), something slightly rank (smells bad but legal) was stupidly covered up by a lie.
You're right. All AG had to do was say, we didn't want them and that's that. If they hadn't put out the original, stupid lie about poor performance, there would have been grumbling, but would any of the fired attorneys talked? Probably not. And AG would probably still be attorney general.
Posted by: K | August 28, 2007 07:22 AM
Mal,
I am glad to see that you have not lost your ability to post amazing things. Like your statement that Reno was worse than Gonzo! LOL LOL. Tell us more, was Clinton worse than Bush?
And just for the record, returning Elian Gonzalez to his father in Cuba was absolutely the right thing to do. In case you miss it, kids at this age want to be with their biological parents, no matter where their parents live.
Posted by: Blue Wind | August 28, 2007 07:37 AM
How has it come to be that arguably the most important cabinet position in the government has ended up being merely a dumping ground for hacks, pals and unqualified folks?
John Mitchell-Nixon pal and eventual crook; Richard Kleindeinst-convicted perjurer; William French Smith-Reagan pal; Ed Meese-Reagan pal and crony; Janet Reno-inept; Gonzalez-Bush crony
Posted by: fred | August 28, 2007 08:36 AM
"...And just for the record, returning Elian Gonzalez to his father in Cuba was absolutely the right thing to do." (BW)
Yeah, sending a child back to an estranged father against the dying wishes of his mother probably was "the right thing to do," at least in that case. That's exactly what America's "Father's Rights" groups all said.
Regardless, since I believe in securing our borders and greatly limiting even legal immigration and basing it on "needed skills," I fully supported sending Elian back - he was, in my view, an "illegal alien," and "illegal Elian," in this case!
I know Cubans have some special "refugeee status" here, but I don't support that....so, just as I'd support sending back any Mexican kid whose mother died getting him here, I think that it was right to send Elian back too. Just my view on that.
BUT Mal's right!
What's more, he rightly mentioned Waco first (a disaster in unprecedented official carnage) and you act as though the Elian Gonzalez case was Reno's worst moment, since you commented on nothing else.
Try her decision to incinerate 80 innocent people (including 23 children) at Waco, over a harmless "spiritual leader" and cultist David Koresh.
The Sheriff of Waco has said on many occasions that had the FBI &/or BATF come to him, he could've picked up Koresh any time, as he came to town at least twice a week and the Sheriff never had any problem getting him to come to the Sheriff's office to talk to him.
While Roberto Gonzalez has been antithetical to 2nd Amendment Rights and ineffectual and incompetent in most other areas, Reno was worse, as despite her overall incompetence, she was still able to exact a bloodlust against fringe religious groups and legal Militia groups (ie. the Michigan and Orange County Militias), while ignoring real domestic terror groups like ALF & ELF.
Posted by: JMK | August 28, 2007 10:45 AM
Fred, you can go all the way back to JFK installing his brother Bobby as AG.
While I applaud RFK's working with Roy Cohn as Joe McCarthy's pit bulls in the 1950s anti-Communist crusade, I think his going after the mob in the wake fo their basically stealing an election for his brother was, at the least, "bad form."
There should've probably been a grace period of a couple years before he went and did that.
And don't forget the greatest anti-American traitor of the 20th Century - Ramsey Clark who was AG under LBJ!
As Yusef Islam (formerly Cat Stevens) said, to the question, "Would you attend a rally where Salmon Rushdie was burned in effigy,"....answering,I'd rather attend one where Rushdie himself was burned," well, that's pretty much how I feel about Ramsey Clark.
Posted by: JMK | August 28, 2007 10:55 AM
shame on me...how could I forget Ramsey Clark/ Although he doesn't fall in the hack, crony, etc category, but rather in the "giant a-hole" category.
Posted by: fred | August 28, 2007 12:19 PM
So... Harriet Miers for AG? ;-)
Posted by: CRB | August 28, 2007 01:09 PM
Sen Larry Craig for Solicitor General. Couldn't resist. Old joke...plug in new name.
Posted by: fred | August 28, 2007 02:11 PM
"...how could I forget Ramsey Clark/ Although he doesn't fall in the hack, crony, etc." (Fred)
No, he wasn't in the "hack, crony, category," yes more like the "giant a-hole category."
You know what, Larry Craig or anyone else would probably make a better AG than Chertoff.
I've heard Giuliani float Bill Bratton's name as his Veep, a real bad idea that I'm sure the GOP would (hopefully) squash, BUT Bratton would indeed make a terrific AG!
Who could forget that priceless, timeless rejoinder in defense of his crackdown on NYC's "squeegee-men?"
"I say, get off the booze, get off the drugs and GET A JOB!"
That's exactly the kind of law & order AG the U.S. needs right now.
Posted by: JMK | August 28, 2007 03:51 PM
The same Bratton who Giuliani pushed out as police commissioner in 1994 because he was envious of all the good press Bratton was getting? I'd be shocked--and disgusted at Giuliani's poor judgment in choosing a running mate. Bratton's good at what he does but VP? No. (see Quayle, Dan; Agnew, Spiro; Miller, William; Ferraro, Geraldine)
Posted by: fred | August 28, 2007 04:04 PM
Yeah, he mentioned Bratton's name in that regard.
That WOULD be a bad choice. He'd need a Westerner or a Southern Republican for VP.
Still, I do believe that Bill Bratton would be a great choice for AG.
Not even NYC's Liberal Pres dared give Bratton any static over his, at times, "very aggressive" crackdown on street crime.
I dare say that there's no one in the national media who'd take on Bratton face-to-face.
Hell, Bratton would have no trouble backing down the vaunted Bill O'Reilly, "the Centrist that Liberals fear most."
Posted by: JMK | August 28, 2007 05:28 PM
I am tired of reading wingnut ideas and concepts. I used to find them kind of fun to read, but now I find them very boring.
Posted by: Blue Wind | August 28, 2007 05:30 PM
I know what ya mean. There's nothing more tiresome than stale, worn-out liberal nonsense.
Posted by: BNJ | August 28, 2007 06:02 PM
I know what ya mean. There's nothing more tiresome than stale, worn-out liberal nonsense.
No, no no :) I said "wingnut"...like ...wingnut. That is not a liberal characteristic.
Posted by: Blue Wind | August 28, 2007 06:07 PM
I don't know what you could possibly disagree with over what I said about Bill Bratton BW, after all, it was his strategies that saved NYC, after David Dinkins' Liberalism ran it into the ground.
During Dinkins' tenure homicides in NYC topped 2,000 per year!
Bratton's "broken window" theory that went after "quality of life" crimes to snag those with outstanding warrants on other crimes, sought to keep repeat offenders in jail for longer and longer periods, aggressive "stop & frisks," etc., etc., was what turned NYC around.
Simply put, he's earned his nickname - "the great man."
He is so great that he transcends mere politics...many close to him say that he is as "above all that" (politics) as much as is the Dalai Lama, but for different reasons, of course.
Posted by: JMK | August 29, 2007 12:41 AM
"I don't know what you could possibly disagree with over what I said about Bill Bratton BW
I dont know if disagree with that. I did not read it. But I disagree with EVERYTHING you say JMK. There is not a single thing on which I agree with you.
Posted by: Blue Wind | August 29, 2007 07:45 AM
Really?
You're saying you don't believe America is the greatest country in the world largely because of its Bill of Rights that protects the individual FROM government excess, enshrines individual Liberty (personal ownership/responsibility), private property rights and economic Liberty, making Capitalsim (the most effective and efficient economic force in existence) the basis for the American economy?
You're saying you don't believe THAT???
I mean I've agreed with you that socialism (the government-run economy) DOESN'T (cannot) work and the market-based economy DOES...
Posted by: JMK | August 29, 2007 10:35 AM
Bill Bratton is a quality commissioner with a shock value that, like the late Billy Martin, works best in the short term but wears thin as time goes on.
His ego is as larger, if not larger than Giuliani's - which fact led to his dismissal as Bratton prefers to claim all success achieved as his own.
You might recall that after his 'resignation' in NYC, his successor continued to bring down crime numbers.
He has already had some problems in LA with the overreaching that his police seem to do. Call it skating on the edge if you will.
Bratton's history shows that he is not a team player but rather more like a mercenary brought in to achieve a quick turnaround in law enforcement.
His entire history screams that this man is incapable of being anything but autonomous - hence unable to serve in a cabinet and be a subordinate.
Posted by: mal | August 29, 2007 11:07 PM
"His ego is as larger, if not larger than Giuliani's..." (Mal)
That's very true Mal, but those kinds of jobs, in fact most management jobs in the emergency services require a big ego.
What's more, Bratton was responsible for the policies that brought down the out-of-control crime rate under Dinkins (who had the current Police Commissioner, Kelly, as his commissioner).
It WAS Bratton's handiwork and that's why two subsequent poor replacements (Safir and Kerick) were able to simply follow Bratton's blueprint and keep crime, especially street crime and random violent crime down.
In fact, the vaunted Street Crime Unit had remained a singular, independent Unit, with its own command and control structure until Safir sought to reproduce that Unit in almost every precinct.
He was warned against doing that, six months before a street crimes Unit, without a Seargent present and working out of a local precinct instead of as an independent Unit, shot and killed Amadou Diallo in the Bronx, giving the Unit a black eye.
Another positive about Bill Bratton is that he bullies the press, he doesn't allow the press to bully him.
Sure, he took some recent flak for doing the right thing vis-a-vis the illegal alien riot back in May in LA.
Ask any NYC cop Mal, and they'll tell you that Kerick and Safir were both disasters, while Bratton was fiercely pro-cop...much more so than Giuliani, who paid them lip-service and front loaded two successive contracts with zero percent raises, while doling out 25% pay hikes to his Deputy Mayors and Commissioners.
If you look back, Bratton was the best thing that ever happened to the Giuliani administration. Giuliani got lucky with Bill Bratton. He wasn't so fortunate with Safir or Kerick.
Hell, those two make Kelly (a poor comparison to Bratton) look great!
Posted by: JMK | August 30, 2007 08:56 PM
As always, some vaild points, JMK.
I will cede the point that Bratton created a blueprint of success which inferiors were able to emulate.
However...being a cop's top cop is a double-edged sword as we both know. It's one thing to support your rank and file. It's quite another to support them on every issue, even with proof of malfeasance evident to all as he did on several occasions.
More to the point, how exactly does his controversial experience as a police commissioner for several major cities qualify him for political office, exactly?
I note that you skirted that aspect of my post.
Posted by: mal | August 31, 2007 10:16 PM
"how exactly does his controversial experience as a police commissioner for several major cities qualify him for political office, exactly?" (Mal)
I don't know that it does, although, Bobby Kennedy didn't even have that kind of experience....his job before becoming AG was as one of Joe McCarthy's pit bulls, along with Roy Cohen.
Some would probably say that that experience negated RFK's being "qualified" for AG. Not me, of course, but certainly some would probably assert that.
What were Ramsey Clark's and Alberto Gonzalez's qualifications?
And wasn't Janet Reno a Miami city attorney who made her career there prosecuting cops?
I'm not saying there shouldn't be credentials for that job, only that most of those appointed to that position didn't have much prosecutorial experience.
And yes, being a "cop's cop" is certainly a double-edged sword.
I just credit Bratton with the actual drop in crime in NYC....I credit Giuliani for picking bRATTON AS HIS pOLICE Commissioner.
Posted by: JMK | September 2, 2007 11:51 AM