posted November 08, 2007 03:03 PM            

They've introduced more than 50 resolutions to either immediately withdraw all US forces from Iraq, stage a phased withdrawal or cut off funding for the troops altogether. In addition to all that, they've attempted to give captured terrorists US citizens rights in criminal law courts and even attempted to stop Bush from listening in on conversations between terrorists.

They've run endless and futile investigations of Republicans in the administration looking for some dirt...while totally ignoring the very deep dirt pits of dem-o-scats. They've tried to criminalize routine political activities.

They've committed treason by stating the US has already lost the war in Iraq and tried to make the foremost traitor in the House...John Surrender Now Murtha the number 2 member of the dem-o-scat House leadership. They've called US military personnel: A-stupid, B-terrorists and C-cold blooded murderers. They've called a 4 star General, author of the Iraqi Surge policy...which is working btw...a liar when he delivered his report to Congress.

This radical leftist led dem-o-scat congress has accomplished not a damned thing on any front, while at the same time bashing the troops with lies and giving aid and comfort to our terrorist enemies. These leftist morons are telling the terrorists to just hold on, keep fighting and we will save you from the halls of the Congress of the United States.

And yet, these morons wonder why their job approval rating is only 11%.

Quite a record but wait, there's more.

November 07, 2007
Dennis Kucinich: Live and Unhinged
Rick Moran

Watching the Democrats yesterday on the House floor, one could be forgiven for laughing out loud at their dilemma.

Perhaps the most unhinged member of their caucus, Dennis Kucinich (D-OH), a certifiable moonbat who is making something of a vanity run for president, offered up a privileged motion to impeach the Vice President of the United States, Dick Cheney.

Never mind that his "case" was weak. It was damn near invisible. But Kucinich soldiered on with it and the Democrats scrambled for cover.

The vote to kill Kucinch’s privileged resolution began as a largely party-line affair, but halfway through the vote, Rep. John Shadegg (R-Ariz.) persuaded Republican leaders to get rank-and-file GOP lawmakers to change their votes to force the debate.

At one point, the vote to table the motion stood at 246-165. Once Republicans began switching their votes, momentum swung the other way. When the vote stood at 205-206, some Democrats began switching their votes.

The vote to kill Kucinich’s resolution finally failed 162-251, giving Republicans the opportunity to watch Democrats debate whether to impeach Cheney — a debate in which many liberal Democrats were more than willing to engage.

Knowing full well the political disaster of impeaching the Vice President on evidence Kucinich brought down from his stay on that UFO he was talking about last week, Democrats tried to rid themselves of the resolution only to have the Republicans gleefully deny them that opportunity. Instead of tabling the resolution (which would have defeated it), the GOP forced the Democrats into another vote to refer it to committee by switching dozens of their votes, defeating the motion to set the resolution aside.

posted November 10, 2007 12:38 PM            

This week is the one-year anniversary of Democrats winning Congress. But House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid probably aren't in a celebrating mood. The goodwill they enjoyed after their victory is gone. Their bright campaign promises are unfulfilled. Democratic leadership is in disarray. And Congress's approval rating has fallen to its lowest point in history.

The problems the Democrats are now experiencing begin with the federal budget. Or rather, the lack of one. In 2006, Democrats criticized Congress for dragging its feet on the budget and pledged that they would do better. Instead, they did worse. The new fiscal year started Oct. 1--five weeks ago--but Democrats have yet to send the president a single annual appropriations bill. It's been at least 20 years since Congress has gone this late in passing any appropriation bills, an indication of the mess the Pelosi-Reid Congress is now in.

Even worse, the Democrats have made clear all their talk about "fiscal discipline" is just that--talk. They're proposing to spend $205 billion more than the president has proposed over the next five years. And the opening wedge of this binge is $22 billion more in spending proposed for the coming year. Only in Washington could someone in public life be so clueless to say, as Sen. Reid and Rep. Pelosi have, that $22 billion is a "relatively small" difference.

Let's also be clear about what it means to roll back the president's 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, as the Democrats want to do. Every income-tax payer will pay more as all tax rates rise. Families will pay $500 more per child as they lose the child tax credit. Taxes on small businesses would go up by an average of about $4,000. Retirees will pay higher taxes on investment retirement income. And now we have the $1 trillion tax increase proposed as "tax reform" by the Democrats' chief tax writer last month.

Failing to pass a budget, proposing a huge spike in federal spending and offering the biggest tax increase in history are not the only hallmarks of this Democratic Congress.
Beholden to MoveOn.org and other left-wing groups, Democratic leaders have ignored the progress made in Iraq by the surge, diminished the efforts of our military, and wasted precious time with failed attempts to force an immediate withdrawal from Iraq. They continue to try to implement this course, which would lead to chaos in the region, the creation of a possible terror state with the third largest oil reserves in the world, and a major propaganda victory for Osama bin Laden as well as for Iran, Hamas and Hezbollah.

After promising on the campaign trail to "support our troops," Democrats tried to cut off funding for our military while our soldiers and Marines are under fire from the enemy. For 19 Senate Democrats, this was simply a bridge too far, so they voted against their own leadership's proposal. Democrats also tried to stuff an emergency war-spending bill with billions of dollars of pork for individual members. Now the party's leaders are stalling an emergency supplemental bill with funding for body armor, bullets and mine-resistant vehicles.

After pledging a "Congress that strongly honors our responsibility to protect our people from terrorism," Democrats have refused to make permanent reforms of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act that the Director of National Intelligence said were needed to close "critical gaps in our intelligence capability." Their presidential candidates fell all over each other in a recent debate to pledge an end to the Terrorist Surveillance Program. Then Senate Democratic leaders, thinking there was an opening for political advantage, slow-walked the confirmation of Judge Michael Mukasey to be the next attorney general. It's obvious that this is a man who knows the important role the Justice Department plays in the war on terror. Delaying his confirmation is only making it harder to prosecute the war.

Democrats promised "civility and bipartisanship." Instead, they stiff-armed their Republican colleagues, refused to include them in budget negotiations between the two houses, and have launched more than 400 investigations and made more than 675 requests for documents, interviews or testimony. They refused a bipartisan compromise on an expansion of the State Children's Health Insurance Program, instead wasting precious time sending the president a bill they knew he would veto. And they did this knowing that they wouldn't be able to override that veto. Why? Because their pollsters told them putting the children's health-care program at risk would score political points. Instead, it left them looking cynical.

The list of Congress's failures grows each month. No energy bill. No action on health care. No action on the mortgage crisis. No immigration reform. No progress on renewing No Child Left Behind. Precious little action on judges and not enough on reducing trade barriers. Congress has not done its work. And these failures will have consequences.

Democrats had a moment after the 2006 election, but now that moment has passed. They've squandered it. They have demonstrated both the inability and unwillingness to govern. Instead, after more than a decade in the congressional minority, they reflexively look for short-term partisan advantage and attempt to appease the party's most strident fringe. Now that Democrats have the reins of congressional power, their true colors are coming out and the public doesn't like what it sees.

posted November 13, 2007 01:42 PM            

Instead, businesses, including corporations pass along their tax burden in the price of goods and services they sell consumers.

Consumers pay the tax load for businesses in the form of higher prices.

Everyone on earth understands this...except for moronic leftists.

Those who vote for candidates who promise to tax corporations are really authorizing a tax on themselves.

It must be this way. Businesses cannot simply eat tax increases...which are really "business costs". They must pass those costs of doing business on to those who consume their products or services...or go out of business.

The nonsense coming out of the new democrat congress...and out of the mouths of the "Progressive", Hillary, The Breck Girl and Obama "uniquely disqualify" them from ever being President of the United States.

Democrats' 'accomplishments'
Posted: November 13, 2007
1:00 a.m. Eastern

I remember the hand wringing of Republican voters after Democrats took control of Congress in 2006. Many may remember my saying at the time that their takeover didn't concern me in the least because Democrats have unequivocally proven their inability to govern. I was right then as I am right now.

John Hill of the Sacramento Bee reported that Democrat voters are becoming dissatisfied with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi ("Voters' views of Pelosi, Congress have dimmed," SacBee.com, Oct. 27). Democrat voters' angst is caused by a perception amongst their ranks that nothing is being accomplished. But that is a relative construct, and they would be well-warned to consider how they employ same, because Pelosi et al. have been very busy indeed.

Democrats have raised taxes. When they took majority leadership just months ago, they had campaigned, and were "elected in part by promising fiscal responsibility. [They] specifically pledged to limit spending increases and [to] employ pay-as-you-go (PAYGO) budgeting to keep the budget deficit in check.

"[Now] as their first year approaches an end, it has become clear that members of the majority have failed to live up to their promises. In just 10 months, Congress has passed legislation that would increase federal spending by a combined $454 billion over 10 years and raise taxes and fees by $98 billion over 10 years – and has passed a budget resolution that would bring the tax increase to a projected $2.7 trillion.

Despite the Democrats' PAYGO pledge of no new deficit spending, legislation enacted thus far has increased spending faster than taxes, resulting in an additional $356 billion in deficit spending. Only their budget blueprint, which assumes repeal of nearly all of the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, would pay for all of their new spending." ("The Democratic Congress 2008 Budget: A tax and spending spree," Brian M. Reidl, Backgrounder #2081, Oct. 30.)

The House, with Pelosi at the lead, has held nearly 1,000 roll call votes, eclipsing their old record of 942 set in 1978. In what could be viewed as an attempt to have activity confused with achievement, they are ahead of the curve – yet still have nothing tangible to show for it. But then again, they didn't promise to get anything done as such – they promised more votes.

To illustrate this point, Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio, seized his opportunity to have a roll call vote and attempted to impeach Vice President Cheney. It is worth noting that he would rather impeach Cheney than impeach Cheney's boss. But I digress.

Democrat voters might be advised to look at things another way. During the 2006 campaign, Democrats pledged they would work harder, remain in session more days and hold more votes. Having met their objective of having more votes, it would appear they have also met their objective of having worked harder. Why else would they now vote themselves a four-day work week? Would they break a campaign pledge unless they had already met said objective?

Then again, they might be breaking their promise to work harder in an effort to help Pelosi – who, having failed, less than a month after taking over as speaker of the House, in her bullying tactics to secure military aircraft for domestic flights for herself, her staff, her relatives and members of the California delegation, must now suffer the indignities of the proletariat and take commercial carriers.

At a time when the U.S. is best served with Turkey as a quasi-ally, Pelosi, in an attempt to curry favor, money and votes, supports a resolution that would have the U.S. proclaim Turkey guilty of Armenian genocide some 90 years ago – eerily similar to Carter's betrayal of the late Shah Pahlavi of Iran.

Pelosi stumbled and fumbled her way through her ill-advised Middle East trip, thinking she was the answer to that region's problems. There was her attempt to have the disgraced and impeached former Florida judge-turned-congressman, Alcee Hastings, become chairman of the House Intelligence Committee – and there was her endorsement of the disgraced John Murtha, the corrupt representative from Pennsylvania, to become majority leader. Then there is their relentless undermining of our military and our troops who are in harm's way.

No, my Democrat friends, the elected of your party haven't been idle, and they have reinforced one resounding truth, i.e., they cannot lead, and their 22 percent approval rating overall attests it. My suggestion to those of you who are disgusted with your party is to remember the phrase "caveat emptor" – because, in essence, you bought them when you voted them in.

And for the record, a word to my Republican voters who are just as disgusted with those in their party – what makes you think that electing more of the same based on the same old promises will bring about any quantifiable change within our party?

posted November 14, 2007 11:34 AM            

dem-o-scats are riding that hell bound train, vowing to raise everyones taxes, desert those in Iraq who trusted the US...which is about 70% of Iraqi citizens who voted in elections there...FOR REPRESENTATIVE GOVERNMENT, cut off money for bullets, guns, tanks, body armor and up-armored personnel carriers for our troops, force a socialist health-care system on America which would destroy the BEST health-care on earth, give terrorists American civil rights, surrender sovereignty of the US to unelected bungling, corrupt, incompetent bureaucrats at the UN.

Face it acoustic, dem-o-scats are self destructing before our very eyes.

Their butt boys and girls in the leftist press are destroying their own credibility to the point that only 19-21% believe all or even most of what they say or print.

All in all, it's become clear dem-o-scats are incapable of leading the government of the United States. I've been ahead of the curve acoustic. I've known that since I was 20 years old.

Now acoustic, if you think Republicans are going to compromise on those issues with these loony-bin Marxists or be persuaded by their bullshiiit rhetoric..."We will raise taxes on corporations", "We will take the profits of oil companies"; referring to individuals, "We will take things away from you...for the public good. Straight Marxist theology from Comrade Hillary...then acoustic, you are entirely delusional.

This is the dem-o-scat Congress and it's job approval rating with Americans is.....a whopping 11%. How low can they go? They're already exploring new lows never before seen by any Congress.

posted November 14, 2007 12:06 PM            

What you're posting is plain and simple spin.

There's a big difference.

You say politics is about "compromise" in relation to Democrats, but the reality is that compromise is a two-way street. If Democrats are expected to compromise, then Republicans are as well.

posted November 14, 2007 12:22 PM            

Hahaha, what you've said...is the whole picture acoustic?

Let's see, demoscats propose to turn all US military hardware over to UN bunglers...and all US military personnel over to UN commanders...for instance.

Republicans block the demoscat initiative and demoscats accuse Republicans of failing to compromise or be persuaded.

posted November 14, 2007 12:37 PM            

I know all you leftists are displeased these leftists morons haven't been able to surrender to the terrorists in Iraq...and elsewhere. But take note, the radical leftist fringe...which is the base of the dem-o-scat party is only about 10% of Americans. That 10% makes most of the rest of us want to throw up.

posted November 14, 2007 12:52 PM            

Please, oh please give illegal aliens drivers licenses...it will make them "better" drivers.

Yeah, my business license makes me a "better" businessman.

NY governor drops immigrant license plan
Wed Nov 14, 2007 11:38am EST

WASHINGTON (Reuters) -
New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer on Wednesday dropped a controversial plan to issue driver's licenses to illegal immigrants because of overwhelming opposition to the policy.

"I've concluded that New York state cannot conduct this program on its own," Spitzer said at a Capitol Hill news conference. "It does not take a stethoscope to hear the pulse of New Yorkers on this topic."

Spitzer's plan sparked a national debate over the extension of certain privileges to illegal immigrants and haunted Democratic presidential front-runner New York Sen. Hillary Clinton on the campaign trail.

Clinton's equivocating answer to a question in a debate about whether she supported Spitzer's plan prompted lingering criticism from her closest Democratic rivals, Illinois Sen. Barack Obama and former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards.

Republicans also were using it as a new line of attack against their old foe.

Spitzer said he had come to believe that the proposal would eventually be blocked either by legal challenges or by the New York legislature.

He said he still believed his plan would be the best way to secure the roads in a state with an estimated 1 million illegal immigrants, many of whom drive without licenses or insurance.

He also criticized the federal government for leaving states to deal with illegal immigrants. Congress failed to overhaul immigration laws earlier this year.

"The federal government has lost control of its borders, has allowed millions of undocumented immigrants to enter our country and now has no solution to deal with it," he said at the news conference, where he was joined by Democratic lawmakers from the state.

In an interview with the New York Times, Spitzer acknowledged that he would be criticized for changing course on the issue for the second time in three weeks.

The Times said Spitzer's latest shift was likely to further complicate his relations with Hispanic lawmakers, who supported his original policy but were upset when he offered a revised plan calling for different levels of licenses.

Efforts at a comprehensive overhaul of immigration laws collapsed in the U.S. Congress amid a bitter debate on the future of an estimated 12 million immigrants in the United Sates, many of whom are Hispanic.

posted November 14, 2007 12:54 PM            

quote:

---

The 11% job approval rating is directly related to WHAT this bunch of loons has done

---

posted November 15, 2007 01:25 PM            

What these morons have done is convene numerous House and Senate investigating committees in attempts to criminalize politics.

What these morons have done is to continue loading up legislation with pork...including "earmarks"...which they promised to do away with...including Hillary's earmark for a "Hippie Museum" in New York state. http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/door-is-left-open-for-n.y.-hippie-museum- cash-2007-11-07.html

What these morons have done is seat a House member who is under investigation for bribery. The Justice Dept has video of this leftist moron taking a $100,000 bribe from an undercover federal agent...and some of his co-conspirators have already pled guilty. Additionally, the FBI obtained a valid search warrant and found $90,000 in marked bills from the payoff...in the moron's freezer. Still, he's perfectly acceptable to this corrupt little band of leftist brothers and sisters in the House of Representatives...no matter how much he stinks up the place.

What these morons have done is declare a 4 day workweek for Congress...when they are spending all their time on useless going nowhere legislation and useless committee meetings, failing to get anything done.

One little communist moron introduced a bill to impeach Dick Cheney. Of course all his little leftist moron friends ran from Dennis like he had the plague.

posted December 13, 2007 12:36 PM            

This is a concept leftist morons in the Congress detest. They thought they could RULE BY DECREE.

Now, they're getting some On The Job Training in Constitutional Representative Government and they're not liking their lessons...or their teachers.

To make it worse, the far, far left radical base...which is the real base of this leftist dem-0-scat party as it's now constituted wants to string them up.

So, these leftists in Congress continue to posture and load poison pills into legislation they KNOW DAMNED WELL BUSH IS GOING TO VETO if it ever gets to his desk...and know too that they don't have to votes to override his veto.

Let's call this SPINNING ONES WHEELS which gets nothing of consequence done giving rise to this congress being the Do Nothing Congress

Democrats Blaming Each Other For Failures

By Jonathan Weisman and Paul Kane
Washington Post Staff Writers
Thursday, December 13, 2007; A01

When Democrats took control of Congress in January, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) pledged to jointly push an ambitious agenda to counter 12 years of Republican control.

Now, as Congress struggles to adjourn for Christmas, relations between House Democrats and their colleagues in the Senate have devolved into finger-pointing.

House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles B. Rangel (D-N.Y.) accuses Senate Democratic leaders of developing "Stockholm syndrome," showing sympathy to their Republican captors by caving in on legislation to provide middle-class tax cuts paid for with tax increases on the super-rich, tying war funding to troop withdrawal timelines, and mandating renewable energy quotas. If Republicans want to filibuster a bill, Rangel said, Reid should keep the bill on the Senate floor and force the Republicans to talk it to death.

Reid, in turn, has taken to the Senate floor to criticize what he called the speaker's "iron hand" style of governance.

Democrats in each chamber are now blaming their colleagues in the other for the mess in which they find themselves. The predicament caused the majority party yesterday surrender to President Bush on domestic spending levels, drop a cherished renewable-energy mandate and move toward leaving a raft of high-profile legislation, from addressing the mortgage crisis to providing middle-class tax relief, undone or incomplete.

"If there's going to be a filibuster, let's hear the damn filibuster," Rangel fumed. "Let's fight this damned thing out."

In the past few weeks, the House has thrown wave after wave of legislation at the Senate -- on energy, Iraq war policy, the housing and mortgage crisis, and middle-income tax cuts offset largely by tax increases on the wealthy.

Most of it has died quietly, a predetermined fate that both sides could foresee before the first vote was cast. Yet they went ahead anyway. Just last night, the House, for a second time, passed legislation to stave off the growth of the alternative minimum tax, to be paid for by a measure to stop hedge fund managers from deferring compensation in offshore tax havens. Like the previous House version, it has virtually no chance of passing in the Senate.

Officially, House Democrats blame Senate Republicans, who have used parliamentary tactics to block even uncontroversial measures. But they are increasingly expressing public frustration with Reid and Senate Democrats for not putting up a better fight.

House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank (D-Mass.) called it a "hold and fold" strategy: Senate Republicans put a "hold" on Democratic bills, and Senate Democratic leaders promptly fold their tents.

Asked about his decision on government funding, House Appropriations Committee Chairman David R. Obey (D-Wis.) groused to the Capitol Hill newspaper Roll Call: "I'll tell you how soon I will make a decision when I know how soon the Senate sells us out." Senate Democrats have fired back, accusing Pelosi and her liberal allies of sending over legislation that they know cannot pass in the Senate, and of making demands that will not gain any GOP votes. Sen. Evan Bayh (D-Ind.) noted that, this summer, Reid employed just the kind of theatrics Rangel and other House Democrats are demanding, holding the Senate open all night, pulling out cots and forcing a dusk-till-dawn debate on an Iraq war withdrawal measure before a vote on war funding. Democrats gained not a single vote after the all-night antics.

"I understand the frustration; we're frustrated, too," Bayh said. "But holding a bunch of Kabuki theater doesn't get anything done."

As they wrap up their first year in control of the entire Capitol since 1994, Democrats are trying to prove that they can be an equal partner to Bush. But their first 11 months have been politically and legislatively brutal, with congressional approval ratings dropping this week to 32 percent, a notch below Bush's 33 percent, according to the latest Washington Post-ABC News poll. Their support plummeted as the liberal base grew outraged over the Democratic inability to counter the president on any war issue, while moderates and centrists looking for bipartisan kitchen-table accomplishments instead saw partisan gridlock. The disputes have at times taken on starkly personal tones. In closed-door bicameral leadership meetings, Pelosi has questioned Reid's intentions on issues such as war funding tied to troop withdrawal timelines and an alternative minimum tax fix that is fully funded by tax increase offsets, suggesting that his words have not always matched his actions.

Reid has let his own frustration show. After Republican senators accused Pelosi of lying about her intentions on a comprehensive energy bill, the majority leader offered a backhanded defense.

"I can't control Speaker Pelosi," he said on the chamber floor. "I hope everybody understands that. She is a strong, independent woman. She runs the House with an iron hand. I support what she does, but no one needs to come and tell me I didn't keep my word."

Reid, the son of a hard-rock miner from a tiny, rural Nevada town, and Pelosi, the daughter of a mayor of Baltimore who married a multimillionaire and moved to San Francisco, have little in common on a personal level. They have what several lawmakers and aides describe as a formal, all-business relationship, one that involves little personal chit-chat when they sit down for their weekly meetings on Tuesday evenings.

Some days Reid and Pelosi get down to business and quickly settle cross-chamber disputes, but other times it requires a different touch to deliver certain messages. After Tuesday's Senate Democratic leadership meeting, Reid dispatched deputies to inform Pelosi that the Senate would not stand for the latest offer to eliminate earmarks, as well as all war funds, from a year-end omnibus spending package.

One of those instructed to talk to Pelosi was Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), a fellow Bay Area liberal who is a close friend of the speaker's and engages her in a personal way that Reid never does.

While many House Democrats see Reid's decision-making process as mercurial, one Senate Democrat suggested that some lawmakers might confuse Reid's tone and brevity with lack of respect.

"When Harry's done talking, the conversation's over. Boom," the Democratic senator said, mimicking someone hanging up the phone.

A top aide said that Reid and the speaker have a "natural frustration" because of the limitations they face within their chambers, but that both blame Senate Republicans, who have routinely forced Reid to round up 60 votes -- to prevent a filibuster -- on everything from a contentious immigration bill to popular ethics legislation. Even on the best of days, Democrats hold just a 51 to 49 majority in the Senate.

"We understand the speaker can pass bills only with Democratic votes. And we know she understands the Constitution and the closely divided Senate requires Senator Reid to pick up 20 percent of Senate Republicans just to get a vote on something, let alone pass it," said Jim Manley, Reid's spokesman.

The 60-vote threshold has become the flashpoint for the intramural Democratic dispute.

Senate Democrats contend that their House counterparts simply do not understand the modern Senate when they badger Reid about holding all-night filibusters. In a series of 20th-century changes, Senate filibusters became a thing of the past. Rules pushed by senators seeking to pass civil rights legislation allow filibusters to be thwarted if 60 or more members vote to cut off the debate. As long as the minority party has 41 votes, it no longer has to hold the floor and talk a bill to death.

Republicans, who spent 12 years in similar battles, are just enjoying the spectacle.

posted December 13, 2007 01:56 PM            

Obviously, getting something..anything of a positive nature done by this dem-0-scat congress is NOT their goal or objective.

They have attempted to criminalize the political process. Now, they're attempting to force Rove and Bolton to testify...and turn over documents to their committees...concerning the firing or non renewal of appointments for US Attorney.

Both these people have and are covered under Executive Privilege. They don't have to tell Congress if their hair is on fire.

But, the main issue is the firing or non renewal of US Attorney appointees.

All US Attorneys serve AT THE PLEASURE OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES. He doesn't need a reason...or cause to fire them or not renew their appointments for another term.

That makes this an issue...which ISN'T. A non issue upon which these congressional morons are wasting time and resources while they posture and primp before the cameras.

It seems to have slipped these morons minds that Commander Corruption fired all the US Attorneys...I believe 92 or 93..all at the same time..to get the one out of office who was investigating his Arkansas corruption...White Water, Cattlegate and Castle Grande...as well as the bankrupting of an Arkansas Savings and Loan.

Perhaps one of the Republicans will have or find a pair and loudly proclaim that before the news cameras when one of these leftist morons is ranting, raving and posturing for political gain.

December 13, 2007
Read More: Bad behavior

Senate Judiciary approves contempt resolutions against Rove, Bolten

The Senate Judiciary Committee has approved contempt resolutions against Karl Rove, the former top aide to President Bush, and Joshua Bolten, the current White House chief of staff. The vote was 12-7.

The criminal contempt resolutions now move to the Senate floor, although no action on them is expected until next year.

Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.), ranking member of Judiciary, voted in favor of issuing the contempt resolutions, saying the committee's oversight responsibilities must be upheld.

Sen. Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) also supported the resolutions.

"It is a vote that I would prefer not to make," Specter said. "It is a vote I make with reluctance."

The House Judiciary Committee has also approved contempt resolutions against Bolten and former White House Counsel Harriet Miers, but Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) has not set a date for a floor vote yet.

The committee subpoenaed Rove and Bolten over the summer as part of its probe into the firing of nine U.S. attorneys last year. Bush, citing executive privilege, refused to allow Rove and Bolten to testify or turn over documents to the panel. Bolten was subpoenaed in his role as custodian of White House records, while Rve called to testify over his knowledge on the role politics played in the firings.

Leahy said that he and Specter had working to modify the resolutions since they were first debated last week, but added that the panel must enforce its subpoenas if it is to be able to conduct effective oversight of the executive branch.

"The White House counsel asserts that executive privilege covers all documents and information in the possession of the White House," Leahy said, referring to White House counsel Fred Fielding. "They have further and claimed immunity even to have to appear and respond to this committee's subpoenas fr Mr. Rove and Mr. Bolten. And they contend that their blanket claim of executive privilege cannot be tested but must be accepted by the Congress as the last word."

Leahy called this stance "a dramatic break from the practices of every administration since World War II in responding to congressional committees."

Update: White House officials dismissed the Judiciary Committee vote as a political stunt, and they pointed out that Leahy had stated that the Justice Department under former President Clinton would not pursue criminal contempt citations against White House officials when it occurred back in 1999. The Justice Department has stated that it will not allow the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, Jeffrey Taylor, to pursue this case in court. Taylor would normally represent Congress in any legal battle with the White House.

"Senate Democrats are showing that they're more interested in headlines than serious legislation, and they should be fully aware of the futility of pressing ahead on this," said Dana Perino, White House spokeswoman, in a statement.

"It has long been understood that, in circumstances like these, that the constitutional prerogatives of the President would make it a futile and purely political act for Congress to refer contempt citations to U.S. Attorneys."

Perino added:"Senator Leahy may have summed it best in September 1999 when he said the following:

posted December 14, 2007 12:52 PM            

My point fell on deaf ears with a party who belives the majority party has the right to "rule".