| Started By | Comment | ||
|---|---|---|---|
The Virgin Murray |
|||
|
I wonder how many conservatives Obama will be appointing to all those cushy jobs the president gets to fill.
|
|||
TobaccoRhoda |
|||
|
What the hell has that zany Ted Stevens done now?
|
|||
unkle greggo |
|||
The Virgin Murray wrote: Exactly, when job require presidential appointment, they're always going to lean one way. |
|||
Gregoire |
|||
|
This isn't about political appointments. These are 'career attorney' posts.
"To understand Monica Goodling's errors and the issue of intent, you should first know that the Justice Department hires both 'political' and 'career' attorneys. And on page 12 of its report, it says: Cyclical political appointees are different from everyday governmental legal posts. If bias played a part in hiring the latter, you would have a never ending cycle of re-appointments with every political shift in Washington and veers straight into basic discrimination laws. It would essentially be Boss Tweed-era politics.
Last Edited By: Gregoire
07/29/08 2:02 PM.
Edited 2 times.
|
|||
lilnubber |
|||
The Virgin Murray wrote: Um, Federal laws were broken in the politicization of the DOJ by the Bush Administration. This wasn't the usual partisan stuff. U.S. Attorneys
aren't typically political appointments -- they are legal appointments.
|
|||
unkle greggo |
|||
|
I know what you're saying Gregoire, I just don't think it's that big of a deal.
Granted, I would rather see a justice system with no political leaning, including the Supreme Court, but this one just isn't high on my list of shit to be outraged about. |
|||
glazerboy |
|||
|
You should consider it a big deal because some of those positions were counterterrorism posts in which highly qualified individuals were turned down for
employment because they weren't conservative enough for Goodling, et al, and the jobs then went to much less qualified people.
So yes, if you are concerned that the United States puts the best people we have on the terrorism problem, rather than the people who pass some lackey's litmus test, then this should be a big deal. |
|||
ObservingEgo |
|||
|
Tim Kaine??? |
|||
rugslug |
|||
lilnubber wrote: what Federal laws were broken when Clinton fired US attorneys investigating Whitewater? Remember he replaced them with one of his former law students who promptly dropped the investigation? Any laws broken there? Would that be considered politicization of the DOJ? |
|||
glazerboy |
|||
|
Oh ruggy, you are so 90s. Get with the program.
|
|||
Gregoire |
|||
|
BUT CLINTON!
|
|||
unkle greggo |
|||
glazerboy wrote: I'm sure you oppose affirmative action because of the same reasons. |
|||
lilnubber |
|||
|
Greggo, you got all bent out of shape when Obama wasn't "patriotic" because he didn't wear a FUCKING LAPEL PIN, but the Bush Administration
hires people based not on their merit but on how good their reasons for wanting to "serve George Bush" are, and all you can do is yawn.
|
|||
rugslug |
|||
glazerboy wrote: I agree. It's time to start looking forward to 2008 election. These Bush Derangement types keep bogging us down in meaningless distractions. |
|||
StatelyWayneManor |
|||
|
I could be wrong but Tim Kaine may have even less experience than Obama.
He just really, really wants to win Virginia. |
|||
unkle greggo |
|||
lilnubber wrote: Um, I don't think I ever said anything about his FUCKING LAPEL PIN, I also defended his comments about the surge, accusations about his religion, and various other rumors, so blow me. |
|||
B DeBrun |
|||
Gregoire wrote: I'm relieved, relieved I tell you that 100% of the replacements for the entire DOJ DA staff fired by Clinton didn't lean one way or another.... |
|||
merkyl |
|||
|
So people weren't hired on merit but some other factor? When did we start talking about affirmative action?
|
|||
lilnubber |
|||
so blow me. You wish, Greggo. |
|||
rugslug |
|||
merkyl wrote: wait! Obama is FOR affirmative action? I thought he was the post racial candidate? |
|||