Editore"s Note
Tilting at Windmills

Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

April 5, 2007
By: Kevin Drum

YET ANOTHER INVESTIGATION....ABC News reports that the Office of Special Counsel has opened an investigation of GSA chief Lurita Doan. You'll recall that she was the deer in headlights last week who pretended not to remember nothin' bout no PowerPoint presentations and, once the presentation in question was waved in front of her face, not to know what the word "target" meant vis-a-vis Democratic-held congressional districts in 2008. Not a clue in the world.

In the grand scheme of things, this investigation isn't even in the top 20. But that says a lot about the Bush administration, doesn't it?

Kevin Drum 5:01 PM Permalink | Trackbacks | Comments (61)

Bookmark and Share
 
Comments

I guess it was awfully prescient of her not to leave those fingerprints on the glass in the meeting room, then.

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/03/29/lurita-doan-totally-paranoid/

Posted by: mbk on April 5, 2007 at 5:16 PM | PERMALINK

Why do we even need to go through this? Can't Congress impeach her just on the basis of evidence to date? If nothing, that she is either a liar or an idiot?

Posted by: kis on April 5, 2007 at 5:19 PM | PERMALINK

Although I suspect that 98% of these investigations will not result in any real corrective action -- such as firing and/or indicting the bad actors, it will at least keep them so busy defending themselves that they won't have much chance to do more damage to the nation before they have to leave office.

Keep it up guys -- Waxman you're our hero.

Posted by: Alan on April 5, 2007 at 5:20 PM | PERMALINK

Alan: My favorite RSS feed of all time is the one coming from the Oversight committee.

Posted by: Blue Girl, Red State (aka G.C.) on April 5, 2007 at 5:27 PM | PERMALINK

I require new delights. It's been a relatively slow week so this will have to do for now.

Posted by: Mike on April 5, 2007 at 5:31 PM | PERMALINK

Running a special investigation on the basis of Doan attending a political meeting on a GSA conference room?? There has got to be more critical issues in this country that could benefit from more hours of Congressional time.

Even the comment at the end of the article reminds of the past when Gore was accused of making a political call(s) from the Whitehouse phone.

What a waste of time. Can't the new Congress focus on key public issues such as drug policy, health insurance, poverty, education, blah blah....

Posted by: pencarrow on April 5, 2007 at 5:39 PM | PERMALINK

When the person in charge of the nations checkbook is a partisan hack, that's a big deal. And if Clinton were still in office, you would be howling about it.

Posted by: Blue Girl, Red State (aka G.C.) on April 5, 2007 at 5:46 PM | PERMALINK

Watch the clip. It is truly funny. Doan comes across as being too stupid to take seriously. She is just some sort of pathetic doofus. She really has a bad memory. She needs to see someone for early Alzheimers (or is it sometimers) testing. As I said watch the video. If Saturday Night Live can't make a sketch out of that testimony they aren't trying.

Posted by: Ron Byers on April 5, 2007 at 5:50 PM | PERMALINK

Memo to Congress and Senate.

Interrogate, investigate, impeach, indict, incarcerate, in that order.
Everyone of them, every chance you get.
Or else.

Posted by: FitterDon on April 5, 2007 at 5:59 PM | PERMALINK

And if Clinton were still in office, you would be howling about it.

Why would I be howling about it? My point is that I expect Congress to tackle issues of greater importance, many of which get frequently highlighted on the forum, than chasing down memos and culprits practicing petty politics.

Posted by: pencarrow on April 5, 2007 at 5:59 PM | PERMALINK

My point is that I expect Congress to tackle issues of greater importance, many of which get frequently highlighted on the forum, than chasing down memos and culprits practicing petty politics.

Um, you do realize that these petty culprits that you want to leave in position are the very people who would be executing the "drug policy, health insurance, poverty, education" legislation that you prefer congress tackle, right?

Looks to me like we got another concern troll here.

Posted by: Disputo on April 5, 2007 at 6:05 PM | PERMALINK

OOh--I was home that day and watched Doan's entire testimony. It drove me nuts.
She's chief of the US General Services Administration?? What a crony.
It was brought up she had donated $200,000 to the Bush/Cheney campaign. Her answers were beyond the pale, dismissive, failing to recollect---it appeared there were rather clear allegations of improper conduct. Serious malfeasance. Several of her staff gave written statements that doom her, agents felt she lied to them, she tried to defund the investigator. If you looked up the word disingenuous in the dictionary, Doan's photo would be beside it.

Posted by: consider wisely on April 5, 2007 at 6:07 PM | PERMALINK

It isn't just that she held a Republican campaign meeting on government property, it was that six people testified under oath that after the meeting she asked participants how they could use GAO resources to help Republican candidates.

Posted by: Bob on April 5, 2007 at 6:11 PM | PERMALINK

Investigate what? She already said she didn't remember anything in front of Congress. Think she'll remeber more in front of an administration lawyer from Regent U? I bet she remembers Libby.

Posted by: TJM on April 5, 2007 at 6:13 PM | PERMALINK

There was something stinky aboout her setting up a $20,000 per month contract with a woman who had helped her high school daughter get a work/study page-type position in congress.
And quite significantly, a probable violation of the Hatch Act, where her staff were subjected to political activity on the job site--as officials came to the office and presented Karl Rove's power point session for republicans needing to beat out democrats in elections-- she asked what her office and staff could do to help. And the investigator general said she was untruthful with his designees. Plus she sought to undercut him and greatly reduce the funding for investigations at her office. I found her to be smarmy, trying to get away with cutsey answers and feminine gestures with the men questioning her. No way.

Posted by: consider wisely on April 5, 2007 at 6:32 PM | PERMALINK

Ah, Kevin.

More conspiracy theories from resident web hippie, Kevin Dumb.

Well, Kevin, must I remind you of all the scandals of the Clinton years (and which were proven, as opposed to a bunch of innuendo, smear and criminlization of politics against Bush.)

Clinton was involved in Whitewater, Waco, travel agents, allowing Chinese nationals to use the White House, stripping all the W keys off government property, Vince Foster, Monica and Paula and other bimbos, Oklahoma City, bombing an asprin factory, etc.

So who's the bigger crook now?

Posted by: egbert (means business) on April 5, 2007 at 6:45 PM | PERMALINK

'Says a lot about the Bush administration'
because YOU are the speaker, ya schmo-bag!
And, YOU are biased as hell!
duh.

Posted by: bj on April 5, 2007 at 6:47 PM | PERMALINK

I have to say, while this scandal is not the most dangerous or "evil," but it is definately the most explicit. This is why I think it should be more front and center. Bush should be made to defend or reject this woman. Because she explicitly said, "how can we use government resources to help" the Republican party or "our candidates." How much more evidence do you need to show that administration has made it a policy of the government to create a one-party state.

Posted by: Noah on April 5, 2007 at 6:49 PM | PERMALINK

Thx, egbert. I'd forgotten all about the wingnut projections that WJC was responsible for the OKC bombing.

Posted by: Disputo on April 5, 2007 at 6:53 PM | PERMALINK

Kevin a Hippie! I love it. Says a lot about the trolls that are left on board. Clinton. Man do I miss his leadership.

It is hard work for the administration to keep up the correct lies and throw the right people under the appropriate bus. It is hard work! Even the illegal recess appointments have lost their luster.

Wait till we find out about the White House wood-chipper and the missing servants. And the Rove barking in the night.

Posted by: Sparko on April 5, 2007 at 6:54 PM | PERMALINK

Ooooohhhhh! I'm all atremble. Someone hold me! egbert means business!!!

(What a dork!)

Posted by: Blue Girl, Red State (aka G.C.) on April 5, 2007 at 6:57 PM | PERMALINK

w keys? W KEYS??
Jeebus!

Posted by: jay boilswater on April 5, 2007 at 7:03 PM | PERMALINK

There was a big issue with the company below--and I thought this might be her undoing as well.
Wapo described it thusly:

"The five-hour hearing also focused on Doan's involvement last year in a contract dispute with Sun Microsystems, a technology firm that GSA auditors allege had overcharged the government.

Waxman's committee heard testimony from Sen. Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa), who has also been examining the Sun deal.

Grassley testified that his investigators found evidence that Doan and her senior aides urged the agency's contracting staff to renew the contract, despite questions about alleged fraud and overcharging.

By August last year, three contracting officers had balked at renewing Sun's contract with the GSA.

Grassley said that despite "repeated warnings" to senior GSA officials in 2006 about the contract, GSA renewed the contract with Doan's blessing and "with no conditions, strings, or precautions regarding the alleged fraud."

Doan said she had an obligation to keep a close eye on the Sun contract and did nothing wrong. She said she did not "even know" the contract officials involved in negotiations. She said she urged a solution to a negotiation impasse with an important government contractor but did not intervene."

Posted by: consider wisely on April 5, 2007 at 7:05 PM | PERMALINK

Shorter Egbert Meaning Business:

"If you keep pointing out the administration's many crimes, I'll hold my breath."

Posted by: Sparko on April 5, 2007 at 7:08 PM | PERMALINK

One of my kids used to hold her breath when she was a wee lass. So I let her. When they pass out, they start breathing again. And they only do that once.

Posted by: Blue Girl, Red State (aka G.C.) on April 5, 2007 at 7:15 PM | PERMALINK

Yeah, I watched much of that hearing in reruns over the weekend, and my favorite parts were:

(1) Rep. Cummings asks how she can't remember the team-building meeting two months ago, yet remembers details about the contract almost given to her "friend" to improve the GSA's minority/women owned biz rating. To which she replies: "Diversity opportunities for minority and women-owned businesses are a PASSION to me, I've dedicated years to it, I love it, it's important to me, of course I'm going to remember it."

(2) Two hour later, Rep. Clay asks her what percentage of GSA contracts are held by women nd minority-owned businesses, to which she replies: "....umm, I do not have that fact at this time....hold on a minute (turns to talk ot aide)...Can we follow up with that info at a later date?"


Boy, now that's some "passion"!!

Posted by: Tom F on April 5, 2007 at 7:18 PM | PERMALINK

Speaking of the fuzzy little yellow one, I am still trying to figure out how he was in charge of phone-banking in the early 90's, came of age during the Clinton years, and was a college thuglican from 99-01...

Posted by: Blue Girl, Red State (aka G.C.) on April 5, 2007 at 7:19 PM | PERMALINK

BTW, eggburb... Clinton left office with a high approval rating (in the 60s). That's almost twice Bush's rating now. George has been hovering in the low 30s for quite some time... heading into Nixon ratings turf... speaking of crooks.

Recently (Mar. 23-25, 2007), USAToday/Gallup poll asked Americans... "...do you think Bill Clinton was a good president or a bad president?" And 71% said he was a "good president."

And on Feb. 9-11, 2007, the USAToday/Gallup pollsters asked Americans, "Who do you regard as the greatest United States president?"

Clinton came in at fourth and ahead of Bush II at eighth. I've gotta feeling Bush II will eventually slump down below his father just above or below Nixon. I've got faith in George. If anyone can beat Nixon for worst place, he can.

Posted by: Apollo 13 on April 5, 2007 at 7:23 PM | PERMALINK

Clinton came in at fourth and ahead of Bush II at eighth.

Which proves that most USAmericans can name at most eight presidents.

Posted by: Disputo on April 5, 2007 at 7:28 PM | PERMALINK

A-13, Disputo - have I expressed my fondness for the both of you lately?

Posted by: Blue Girl, Red State (aka G.C.) on April 5, 2007 at 7:30 PM | PERMALINK

Sparko: Shorter Egbert Meaning Business: "If you keep pointing out the administration's many crimes, I'll hold my breath."

Blue Girl, Red State: One of my kids used to hold her breath when she was a wee lass. So I let her. When they pass out, they start breathing again.

And this is the problem. We don't want them to start breathing again.

Posted by: bleh on April 5, 2007 at 7:39 PM | PERMALINK

"Diversity" is one word that is rarely associated with the conservative movement in general and the Republican Party in particular. But when it comes to efforts by minority Republicans Alberto Gonzales and Lurita Doan to convert their federal agencies into entrenched partisan redoubts of the GOP, the right has been very quick indeed to turn to the "diversity defense."

For the details, see:
"Gonzales, Doan and the Republican Diversity Defense."

Posted by: AngryOne on April 5, 2007 at 7:45 PM | PERMALINK

Disputo,
The poll ranked 15 presidents in all. Poppy Bush came in at 14 and Nixon at 15. The poll could have been an aided survey (list of names provided) but I would guess the 15 were culled from responses with 1% or better since there is an "Other" category that totals to 1%. Don't have the methodology at hand just "1,006 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3." Here's the poll link if you wanna see % numbers for the 15 presidents listed going back to 1999.

Globe,
Kinda... Poetry has a lasting effect. : )

Props to you as well.

Posted by: Apollo 13 on April 5, 2007 at 7:56 PM | PERMALINK

But don't any of you ever nap through power-point presentations? Especially if they turn the lights low.

Just asking.

Posted by: Bostonian in Brooklyn on April 5, 2007 at 7:57 PM | PERMALINK

Hello All,

I am sorry to get off topic (although it is related to the functionality of our government in general), and I am sorry about the inarticulateness (if that is a word) of my post, but I have a few questions that have been nagging me for some time now. Well, they have been nagging me ever since the "purgegate scandals." In light of evidence that both the US Justice Department and the GSA are both being used to further the goals of the Republican party, I am left wondering how much of our federal government has been overtaken by political hacks who have no experience in government and are using the federal government to attack and smear Democrat candidates (the Justice Department) or use government services to help further the Republicans politically (the GSA).

Specifically, my questions are about the Homeland Security "color-coded" threat level system that was (or still is) in place. As I recall, in 2004 (although I was living in Australia at the time, but I was reading the U.S. news) these threat levels were invoked rather frequently. And they always seemed to suspiciously occur when some new crisis occurred for the Bush administration. And, after a few weeks, we would never hear of them again, or hear about any actions regarding the threats. After November 2004, it seems like we have never had these "threats" anymore - especially on the frequency that we did in 2004.

My questions are:

1. Has anyone actually done a study or any research on when these "color threats" occurred, both before and after the 2004 elections?

2. Has anyone made any comparison between when the "color threats" and the controversial issues that the GOP and Bush were facing at the time the "color threats" were issued? In other words, did these threats usually occur when some new scandal hit the white house?

3. I am just crazy or paranoid (Norman, Al, mhr, MRM, AH, etc. don't answer because I know what you will say anyway.)?

Yes, I admit this sounds a bit paranoid, but with this administration, you never know. The MO of Karl Rove and his candidates seems to be that once elected, use the government resources (whether local, state, or federal) to help the Republican party maintain power. And this is sad because it is such a betrayal of trust. It is such a breach of the social contract.

Anyway, I am sorry about the rant.

Posted by: adlsad on April 5, 2007 at 8:01 PM | PERMALINK

Here's a shorter version of my last post. I guess that I am just wondering how many other government agencies are being used for specifically partisan purposes (i.e. maintaining Republican hegemony). And I am specifically wondering if the "color threats" were specifically used for partisan purposes (to make it appear that President Bush is actually doing something about terrorism and to scare voters to vote Republican) as opposed to being real threats. I am also wondering if anyone has actually done any research on this, because it seemed that this was a big issue in 2004.

Posted by: adlsad on April 5, 2007 at 8:07 PM | PERMALINK

I guess that I am just wondering how many other government agencies are being used for specifically partisan purposes (i.e. maintaining Republican hegemony).

All of them.

Under the cover of the war, much mischief and damage has been done to the gvmt by the GWB admin.

Posted by: Disputo on April 5, 2007 at 8:11 PM | PERMALINK

adlsad - as best I can tell, all of them.

Posted by: Blue Girl, Red State (aka G.C.) on April 5, 2007 at 8:12 PM | PERMALINK

adlsad: Rant here any time! Your post was well thought out and presented clearly. That is always welcome here. So come out of the shadows and stop lurking. We will gladly share our pail and shovel in the PA sandbox! We are liberals, after all.

Posted by: Blue Girl, Red State (aka G.C.) on April 5, 2007 at 8:14 PM | PERMALINK

adlsad,

Look at MSNBC's Keith Olbermann Countdown, The Nexus of Politics and Terror from October 2005 for 13 "coincidences."

Also check Media Matters for a story about Tom Ridges' 2005 admission that Bush administration pressured him to raise threat levels.

Posted by: Apollo 13 on April 5, 2007 at 8:24 PM | PERMALINK

Liberals? Liberals? I am shocked, shocked that there are liberals here- I just thought you were all a bunch of enlightened conservatives...

Actually, the real disappointment with GWB is that no one with any ethics or intellect can defend him, consequently, no decent debates...

Oh, well

Posted by: Out on Bond on April 5, 2007 at 8:30 PM | PERMALINK

"I didn't -- I swear I didn't -- get into politics to feather my nest or feather my friends' nests." -- Bush Jr., in the Houston Chronicle

But then again... the US Constitution is just a goddamn piece of paper!

Why shouldn't the GOP (Greedy Obsolete People) try and destroy every nook and cranny of our federal union?

"God told me to take out Sadaam....."

Name one loyal bushie who is actually scientifically literate and biblically unoriented.

Posted by: Tom Nicholson on April 5, 2007 at 8:33 PM | PERMALINK

BSRG, Apollo 13, and Disputo,

Thank you for your responses. Apollo, the links were very helpful. Thanks!

Posted by: adlsad on April 5, 2007 at 8:47 PM | PERMALINK

Fingerprint and frog-march...
Fingerprint and frog-march...
Fingerprint and frog-march...
Fingerprint and frog-march...

Posted by: ROTFLMLiberalAO on April 5, 2007 at 9:36 PM | PERMALINK

But how can Congress investigate criminal acts when there is so much pain in the world.

Little Jenny Timson is scared. Right now. And all Congress can do is investigate crimes.

And all of the hundreds of people with cancer. All of them. Find a cure for cancer, Congress. If you're worth you're salt.

Posted by: absent concern troll on April 5, 2007 at 9:40 PM | PERMALINK

Sorry, I jumped down to the bottom and I must express my feeling that George W. Bush, The Shrub, The Connecticut Cowboy will ultimately rank at the bottom of the heap of revered presidents, not to mention any presidents! The man is a clown and is rapidly becoming a parody and I have no idea why around 30% of the American public still finds it in their heart to support this clueless bastard!

Posted by: Fred on April 5, 2007 at 9:44 PM | PERMALINK

Ok, I'm going to get serious for a minute.

Any of you ever had a hard job. I don't mean a job that got a little hard sometimes, but was always really hard. It doesn't sound like it.

I had an internship for a state congressman once that was tough. I mean, going full bore the whole eight hours. Tough.

Well, take that experience and multiply by a thousand and then jack it up to the square power. That's how hard the Presidency is. And it's harder now than ever. You have to be on your toes 24/7. Very unreasonable, yet that's the expecation.

My point is, put yourself in Bush's shoes for once. He's a good man. You can tell that by just looking at him. He knows where we're coming from and he wants to do right, and by and large he has done right. But doing the right thing is always the most inpopular thing you can do.

Alright, I said my piece. I just wish you guys would knock it off and be serious for once.

Posted by: egbert (means business) on April 5, 2007 at 9:52 PM | PERMALINK

I mean... have good things ever happened to bad people? Really, think about it...
(I'm being deep.)

The President has done something no other human being has ever done, except for the 40+ other people who did it and didn't suck at it. It used to be so easy. George Washington lived in cheerful times, when France and Britain had weak armies that posed no threat to the robust and shivering America of 1880.

And Bush has no one to help him cook his food, or do his laundry, or wash his ass, or walk his dog. It's hard work when you've got no one to delegate power to.

Can't you tell Putin is a good man by the look in his eyes? You can't blame him when he rolls back Yeltsin's democratic reforms. It's hard work, and sometimes you have to punish political opponents with poisoning & assassination. He's a good man. Really. I saw his eyes.

Stop shaking your head.

Could you just forgive the strong who destroys you?
Hey, it's not a big deal. Don't worry about it!

Posted by: egghead on April 5, 2007 at 10:27 PM | PERMALINK

Sad to say this memory virus is spreading like wild fire.

Here in the Twin Cities we've had a simmering story about 3M chemicals leaching into the groundwater. The member of the MPCA who was originally informed about this problem has conveniently forgotten the conversation with the scientist as she is accused of tardiness in addressing the problem.

Thanks to the example of our witless leaders the preferred defence of the moment is "I don't recall".

It is such a morally bankrupt, irresponsible and spineless defence. We are led by lieing children.

Posted by: notthere on April 5, 2007 at 10:28 PM | PERMALINK

...The man is a clown and is rapidly becoming a parody and I have no idea why around 30% of the American public still finds it in their heart to support this clueless bastard!

Posted by: Fred on April 5, 2007 at 9:44 PM | PERMALINK

You almost got there. You could literally have a cardboard cut-out of Bozo the Clown and, as long as they thought he had been voted in and called preznit, they would support him. The 30% represents those who have no independent judgement of their own, the pathologically anti-Democratic, the blindly loyal, the morally dysfunctional. I'm just wondering what proportion of this 30% is insane or mentally incapable of making an informed choice.

Posted by: notthere on April 5, 2007 at 10:47 PM | PERMALINK

Wow, egbert. I'm...I'm in awe! I feel like such a piker compared to you!

Posted by: Blue Girl, Red State (aka G.C.) on April 5, 2007 at 11:08 PM | PERMALINK

Egbert:

Any of you ever had a hard job. I don't mean a job that got a little hard sometimes, but was always really hard. It doesn't sound like it.

I move pianos. I have also been a rock band roadie, and once drove 10,000 miles in three weeks. What do you do?

Posted by: Repack Rider on April 5, 2007 at 11:26 PM | PERMALINK

I think egbert (means business) is a spoof. Doesn't even read like the real turd, let alone smell like it.

Posted by: notthere on April 6, 2007 at 12:13 AM | PERMALINK
... going full bore the whole eight hours. Tough. eggbutt at 9:52 PM
Poor poor baby had to work.
... That's how hard the Presidency is...eggbutt at 9:52 PM
Not only has your itty bitty buddy Bush taken more vacation than any other president, he works the shortest hours and to the least good effect to the country.
... He's a good man. You can tell that by just looking at him....eggbutt at 9:52 PM
He has never exposed himself as a 'good'man but always as a mean, spiteful, spoiled brat. Nor has he done 'right' by the country from ignoring threats about terrorism to subverting government agencies for a political corporatist agenda. Posted by: Mike on April 6, 2007 at 1:32 AM | PERMALINK

Being Preznint is *hard*.

Posted by: George W. Bush on April 6, 2007 at 1:48 AM | PERMALINK

The ability to lie convincingly about any issue seems to be the mark of the inside circle of Bushies. Bigger lies with more conviction is the plan of the day.

If the Truth will set you free, lies are designed to enslave us all. The liars are the would be enslavers.

Posted by: slanted tom on April 6, 2007 at 7:02 AM | PERMALINK

I was going to suggest that Egbert pick up a copy of Hypoxia for Fun and Profit, but according to G.C., he'll start breathing again as soon as he loses consciousness. Maybe a buddy system could get around that? I know, I know - it's a feature, not a bug.

Eggy, try working a couple of 115 hour weeks in a row. Then factor in 90 minutes daily for commuting.
Slacker. (and I say that as one of the best ...)

Posted by: kenga on April 6, 2007 at 9:12 AM | PERMALINK

Any of you ever had a hard job. I don't mean a job that got a little hard sometimes, but was always really hard. It doesn't sound like it.

I had an internship for a state congressman once that was tough. I mean, going full bore the whole eight hours. Tough.
Posted by: egbert (means business) on April 5, 2007 at 9:52 PM

I would love for little eggy to come work on my roofing tear-off crew.Maybe he could get Glorious Leader to come too!Then they could explain to us how hard it is to be an intern for a congressman.I'm sure it would be really inspiring and make them feel much better about spending 25% of their paycheck on gas.I'll bet they would be very helpful in helping eggy and preznit realize how great this booming economy is for the working man.

Posted by: vbrans on April 6, 2007 at 10:36 AM | PERMALINK

I'm just wondering what proportion of this 30% is insane or mentally incapable of making an informed choice.
Posted by: notthere

'Imagine for a second if instead of Jesus, some psycho was waiting for a magical creature named Fred to come save him this year and suck him up into the sky. Now, who doesn't think that man needs serious counseling and perhaps medical supervision? Now, you change Fred into Jesus, and you have 25% of the country.' - Cenk Uygur (HuffPo)

Posted by: MsNThrope on April 6, 2007 at 11:49 AM | PERMALINK

Any of you ever had a hard job. I don't mean a job that got a little hard sometimes, but was always really hard. It doesn't sound like it. I had an internship for a state congressman once that was tough. I mean, going full bore the whole eight hours. Tough.

AHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHA! Ooooh, poor baby! An eight hour workday, can you imagine? And as an intern this tough day probably consisted of answering phones and licking envelopes. You pussy. You pathetic pussy. You wouldn't last eight minutes at my job.

Well, take that experience and multiply by a thousand and then jack it up to the square power. That's how hard the Presidency is. And it's harder now than ever. You have to be on your toes 24/7.

Then you probably shouldn't be taking a month off for vacation at your private 1,000 estate to clear brush.

My point is, put yourself in Bush's shoes for once. He's a good man.

No, he's a sociopath.

You can tell that by just looking at him. He knows where we're coming from and he wants to do right, and by and large he has done right. But doing the right thing is always the most inpopular thing you can do.

Yeah, doing the right thing is really "inpopular." Just ask Mother Theresa -- man, people hated that bitch.

Posted by: Stefan on April 6, 2007 at 12:22 PM | PERMALINK

I did get some new delights this week
Four at U.S. attorney's office quit top management posts
BY SHANNON PRATHER
...Four top assistants to Minnesota U.S. Attorney Rachel Paulose resigned their management posts Thursday after expressing frustrations with her management style and priorities, according to sources familiar with the situation....
And who is this Rachel Palouse?
...--According to IndiaWest, Paulose is "a registered Republican and has worked for GOP candidates," though she cites a "lack of involvement in big-donor contributing and fundraising" as evidence that she will run her office in a non-partisan manner. However, FEC records show that Paulose has donated $1,500 to Norm Coleman's campaign since November 2005 (go here and search for 'Paulose.')...
[much more in article]

Posted by: Mike on April 6, 2007 at 8:35 PM | PERMALINK




 

 

Read Jonathan Rowe remembrance and articles
Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

Advertise in WM



buy from Amazon and
support the Monthly