The Bosque Boys

"Alleged" power accumulation; unitary executive "theory" and "much maligned" - all words and phrases that imply doubt and baseless accusation. Unfortunately, this is far from true. After all, Bush freely and unabashedly uses signing statements for getting around literally hundreds of curbing legislation, set in motion to keep his power in check - no "theory" need be in place for that fact. All this for power accumulation, and nothing "alleged" about that.

What does BushCo stand to gain from amassing such power? Well, if Gonzo hadn't been found out in his scheme to tilt the balance with his politicizing the DoJ, the Bushies would likely have expected to "win" in '08, keeping the Rovian wet dream of a forever GOP control of government in place. One only has to look at what the painfully "forgetful" Gonzo WASN'T telling us to know the score (unless, of course, you're a breathtakingly stupid 28-percenter, then there's no hope of understanding what was at stake).

Nope. The Bush 'legacy' is one of turning our democracy on it's head and leaving the shredded the Constitution in his disastrous wake. Our only solace is that soon enough he will head home to his "movie set" ranch and pretend at being a cowboy. Our fondest desire, however, would be to see Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Gonzo convicted of war crimes and spending the rest of their days in Guantanamo.

Bless your heart yourstruly! But, I think you missed the point.

My my.

Listen -- I myself am a former conservative. I applied that label to myself happily until late last year when I had to admit I no longer believed a thing Bush or his dwindling band of cheerleaders said or did.

But I recall that serene sense of confidence that you display when I still liked Bush. I admired that arrogance I mistook for confidence, that overwhelming certitude that everyone who disagreed with Bush must "posit Bush is Hitler," as if 60 percent of the country were Chompsky-reading college students. That, in short, everyone was stupid and/or suffering from serious BDS except myself and all those wonderful blogs I read, written by whip-smart people.

This all begins to crack the moment you take a look at the objective facts. The DoJ is leaking attorneys -- if Gonzales was doing a heckuva job, why is everyone bailing, and why is most of the department releaved he's gone? Why does everyone act like there's a mess to be cleaned up?

If he was so good why didn't he pull an Ollie North and walk all over his tormentors in the Senate Judiciary Committee? Where was the verve, the audacity? Or were you simply not paying attention as he mumbled and careened and babbled his way from one "I do not recall" to another?

I won't go into any detail on the larger lessons of the Bush Administration. But it boils down to this: All those checks and balances, the rights of the accused, the investigatory/oversight duties of the Senate, etc., are not simply antiquated obstacles, but necessary stops to a tyranny acting in the name of "public safety."

As for the first comment, please understand for that every comfortably stereotypical "wingnut" there's nine of us who have come to the very reasonable conclusion that President Bush is a failure and a callous and careless user of executive authority.

All you have to do is open your eyes to this unpleasant reality, just like the rest of us.

DU

Waco: all this talk about the imperial presidency and Bush is Hitler is just so much adolescent rebop, probably from people who said the same things about Johnson and Nixon when they were of college age.

I know, because I was a college kid at that time and I heard it from my peers.

Color me rosy, but I still stand behind my President. The Why? is simple: We got knocked to our knees, and George Bush stood up. And he helped us all stand again. The President hasn't wavered from his goals to fight global terrorism and spread liberty.

He is in trouble because, silly him, he actually decided to do something with his presidency. He wanted it to count for something. And for that he will be remembered fondly by history - unlike his disgraced, priapic predecessor who now wants another chance as a power behind the throne.

When you try to do something of significance in this world - like freeing 50 million people from the worst kind of oppression - things aren't always going to go your way. We cannot fight al Qaeda and its Iranian sponsors from 30,000 feet. That is why I say a prayer each day for our wonderful men and women who are prevailing in the fight with terrorists.

We'll complete the job unless politicians hungry for base advantage sell out the nation. Excuse my attitude; normally I'm more of a fun-loving guy. But I came here from Hugh Hewitt's site and the words he posted from Chuck Shumer have made me extremely combative.

Guys like Shumer are the problem. They think it's all a game of who's on top? I don't have time for such dangerous fools.

You guys have a nice site and I hope to come back and be less argumentative.

.
For the record:

I never argued AG was a great AG or President Bush was comparable to George Washington.

My main point: in the midst of all the partisan hyperbole, it is worth noting that these guys are going home soon with the republic in tact.

I tend to agree with Jack. Right or wrong, astute or foolish, a more rational explanation of Bush administration actions assumes that the President did his best for America.

Like him or hate him--it makes little sense to see him as a political anti-christ, intentionally bringing forth a horrific time of tribulation and destruction down on the American political system.