Mukasey Is (Much) Worse Than Gonzales

posted by John Nichols on 11/04/2007 @ 4:31pm

Email
Print
Share
- Buzzflash
- del.icio.us
- Digg
- Facebook
- Mixx it!
- Reddit
What is this?
Take Action
Comments (59)

Subscribe Now

George Bush's nominee to replace disgraced former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, retired Federal Judge Michael B. Mukasey, must be rejected by the Senate Judiciary Committee for the same reason that Gonzales should have been rejected in 2005.

Like Gonzales, Mukasey refuses to accept that the president of the United States must abide by the laws of the land, beginning with the Constitution. In fact, the nominee to replace the worst Attorney General since Calvin Coolidge forced Harry Micajah Daugherty to quit rather than face impeachment is actually takes a more extreme position in defense of an imperial presidency than did Gonzales.

When questioned by Judiciary Committee chair Patrick Leahy, D-Vermont and Constitution sub-committee chair Russ Feingold, D-Wisconsin, during the key hearing on his nomination, Mukasey embraces an interpretation of presidential authority so radical that it virtually guarantees more serious abuses of power by the executive branch.

There is no question that one of the ugliest manifestations of that expansion of authority involves the Bush-Cheney administration's embrace of extraordinary rendition and torture as tools for achieving its ends. But those who focus too intensely on Mukasey's troubling dance around the waterboarding question make a mistake. Even if the nominee were to embrace the Geneva Conventions -- not to mention the 8th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution -- and condemn all forms of torture as the cruel and unusual punishment that they are, he would still be an entirely unacceptable choice to serve as the nation's chief law-enforcement officer.

And while some Democrats on the Judiciary Committee have made their peace with Mukasey -- shame on New York's Chuck Schumer and California's Dianne Feinstein -- the fight to block this nomination cannot be abandoned. Mukasey's critics on the committee, led by Leahy and Feingold, should do everything in their power to re-frame the debate to focus on the broader question of whether a president can break the law -- and on the nominee's entirely unacceptable answers to it. They should pressure Schumer and Feinstein to reconsider, and they should reach out, aggressively, to "Republicans who know better" such as Pennsylvania Senator Arlen Specter.

Mukasey has made the case against his confirmation more convincingly than any of his critics.

The former judge has defended the administration's attempts to dramatically expand the definition of executive privilege, telling the Judiciary Committee that it would be inappropriate for a U.S. attorney to press for contempt charges against a White House official who claimed to be protected by a grant of executive privilege. Under this reading of the law, U.S. attorneys would cease to be independent defenders of the rule of law and become mere extensions of the White House.

As such, Mukasey accepts a politicization of U.S. Attorneys far more extreme than that attempted by Gonzales and former White House political czar Karl Rove when they sought to remove U.S. Attorneys who failed to fully embrace the administration's electoral and ideological goals.

But Mukasey does not stop there.

Under questioning from Feingold, Mukasey endorsed the administration's argument that congressional attempts to define appropriate surveillance strategies and techniques could infringe inappropriately on presidential authority.

When pressed by Feingold, Mukasey refused to say whether he thought the president could order a violation of federal wiretapping rules. Feingold's response was measured. "I find your equivocation here somewhat troubling," said the senator.

In fact, everything about Mukasey's testimony suggested that he would as Attorney General be more of a threat to Constitutional governance than the inept and frequently inarticulate Gonzales. Mukasey gives every indication that he is as enthusiastic as was Gonzales about helping the president to bend and break they law. The scary thing is that Mukasey appears to be a good deal abler when it comes to cloaking lawlessness in a veneer of legal uncertainty.

Consider the nominee's suggestion that the president can ignore any law, including the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, if he and his lawyers determine that the law impinges on his authority as commander in chief during wartime.

"The president is not putting somebody above the law; the president is putting somebody within the law," Mukasey explained, with a response that employed legalese at levels not heard in Washington since Richard Nixon boarded that last plane for San Clemente. "The president doesn't stand above the law. But the law emphatically includes the Constitution."

Leahy said after that "troubling" statement by the man who would be the nation's chief law enforcement officer: "I see a loophole big enough to drive a truck through."

The Judiciary Committee chair is right. It's the truck carrying the trappings of an imperial presidency. And Mukasey should not be handed the keys.

Comments (59)

lets face it, mr. nichols...when "we" "elect" a president these days, we elect a monarch for 4 years. that necessary clause of the constitution is the key to despotism with a spineless congress and pocketed supreme court...

Posted by ibbleblibble at 11/04/2007 @ 4:58pm
Worse than Gonzales? Of course he is! He's a Republican!

Posted by pontificus at 11/04/2007 @ 7:05pm
Nichols scribbled:

Consider the nominee's suggestion that the president can ignore any law, including the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, if he and his lawyers determine that the law impinges on his authority as commander in chief during wartime.

I'm just wondering - does Nichols know ANYTHING AT ALL about separation of powers? Isn't there some minimum required level of education here at the Nation before someone is deemed qualified to comment on constitutional issues? Sheesh.

Posted by pontificus at 11/04/2007 @ 7:08pm
Waterboarding is deliberately filling the victims lungs with water in a slow and controlled manner, the victim may die if it isnt stopped in time. It has historically been a popular form of torture, because the victim's physical state quickly recovers and the victim may then be waterboarded again and again.

The Government should not be trusted with this kind of power.

Where are the Conservatives who believe in being skeptical, about the "services" that the Government provides. Where are the Republican Scholars who know that the US Constitution forbids Torture, and searches intrusions into privacy without a warrant.

Where are the Conservatives who know who really attacked America on 911 - the remnants of the mujahadeen in Afghanistan who fought the Soviets, then turned against America - Not Iran, Not Iraq. Where are the Conservatives - decent ones - who hold the truth and American virtues dear?

Where are the Democrats who will realize who you're dealing with and stop another Torturer from becoming Attorney General????

Posted by conshame at 11/04/2007 @ 8:00pm
Too bad it's a done deal, Nichols........And, he'd just get a recess appointment anyway, if he were not approved...the dems have wisely decided that they can't brand Dubya as an obstructionist if the hold up his AG, so they'll cave....(heh,heh)

Again........

Posted by davebarlett at 11/04/2007 @ 8:22pm
By now everyone should have come to terms with the simple truth that the chimp is going to do whatever he wants to do until the moment he leaves office.

Posted by Will C. at 11/04/2007 @ 9:19pm
Posted by PONTIFICUS 11/04/2007 @ 7:08pm

PONTI, want to either get you going into full-blown nuttiness...or start back-pedaling like a Tour de France in reverse...

So...are you saying that according to 'separation of powers'...a President "in wartime"...has absolute and uncontrollable power?

Posted by Mask at 11/04/2007 @ 9:25pm
So...are you saying that according to 'separation of powers'...a President "in wartime"...has absolute and uncontrollable power?

Posted by MASK 11/04/2007 @ 9:25pm

I think scootificus was being sarcastic about the title of the article cumbuckets and wasn't realy commenting on any of the words you just tried placing in his mouth

Posted by Will C. at 11/04/2007 @ 9:30pm
By now everyone should have come to terms with the simple truth that the chimp is going to do whatever he wants to do until the moment he leaves office.

Posted by WILL C. 11/04/2007 @ 9:19pm

I'VE COME TO TERMS WITH ***THAT*** PARTICULAR FACT...

I just haven't come to terms with the Democratic majority in (both houses of) Congress letting Bush get away with it....

Posted by w_m_bear at 11/04/2007 @ 9:45pm
Posted by WILL C. 11/04/2007 @ 9:30pm

Odd? WILL defending PONTI?!!!?!?!?!?

LOL!

Posted by Mask at 11/04/2007 @ 9:47pm
I think John is right on the money. If you'd read Mukasey's written responses to questions you'd see:

- He believes the President is free not to abide by a law as long as he feel it is not Constitutional. (He can make up his own rules when he feels like it.) He frames his advice this way: "I will advise the President to comply with all constitutional laws."

- Mukasey has no problem with Bush's Signing Statements

- He believes executive privelege extends to matters not personally involving the President.

- Mukasey does not support the prosecution of Contempt of Congress cases

- He will shed no more light on OLC opinions than Gonzalez has.

- Mukasey would quit before he'd stand up for legal governance.

- He'd quit before standing up for detainee's rights.

- Mukasey feels, and I quote, "...a difficult separation of powers question would arise if FISA's limitations were to conflict with the President's inherent authority under the Constitution."

- He believes telecommunication companies deserve retroactive immunity. After all, it couldn't be their fault if they did something illegal at the government's request. (but I don't see him pushing for prosecution of those who made the requests)

- Mukasey doesn't feel post 9/11 detainees were mistreated in New York, and he doesn't feel he abused his authority with regards to the issuance of material witness warrants.

- He feels that the Constitution obligates the President "to protect and defend the country." (Sorry, but that's supposed to be the Constituion he's defending)

I see nothing at all that makes this guy better than AG AG.

The argument that Bush would just give this guy a recess appointment is a lousy one. The Senate has a job to do - advise and consent, not roll over and play dead. If they stand firm, they can prevent a recess appointment. If the MAJORITY members on the committee don't stand up for what they believe in now, they'll just find themselves bogged down in oversight hearings all over again. Everything they've accomplished will have been for naught.

Posted by blueGeorgia at 11/04/2007 @ 9:58pm
If the MAJORITY members on the committee don't stand up for what they believe in now, they'll just find themselves bogged down in oversight hearings all over again. Everything they've accomplished will have been for naught.

Posted by BLUEGEORGIA 11/04/2007

And, everything they've accomplished would be......What?

Posted by davebarlett at 11/04/2007 @ 10:10pm
as long as there's a crisis in the world...we got elected kings and queens...

hey...the commies are gone...how do we justify crisis constitution based on outside threat?

islamofascism!

(pssst - there's always an outside thhreat...always a crisis brewing that can justify perverting the ideals of the constitution)

Posted by ibbleblibble at 11/04/2007 @ 10:12pm
What they've accomplished is getting rid of Gonzo and the rest of the clowns who were making a mockery of the Justice Department. If they confirm Mukasey, they'll have the same job to do after they feign suprise about his performance.

Posted by blueGeorgia at 11/04/2007 @ 10:27pm
so i wonder if mukasey supports this...

neoconfantasy [tinyurl.com]

not waterboarding, but looks like torture to me...someone should hold the pic up to ole mukky and ask if he supports this...

wonder how sen. craig would react...

Posted by ibbleblibble at 11/04/2007 @ 10:35pm
but thats not torture! just a little frat boy hazing!

Posted by ibbleblibble at 11/04/2007 @ 10:36pm
wonder if that guy was a terrorist...bet after soe of that torturing he was...if he's still alive and/or free...

hell...i wonder how many "islamofascist" terrorists that photo made!

Posted by ibbleblibble at 11/04/2007 @ 10:38pm
i get it! keep torturing and letting out the pics...creates more outraged terrorists...outside threat crisis = IMPERIAL PRESIDENT!

Posted by ibbleblibble at 11/04/2007 @ 10:40pm
Right, the president is in war...but not necessarily in Iraq but with American citizens that want to keep their freedoms and constitutional rights and want to keep this society civilized and respectful of the law. Being in that predicament, our Dem representatives in Congress should take the right side backing us in this war!

I am so disappointed of the Dem 'centrists'!

Posted by Frank42 at 11/04/2007 @ 11:44pm
we're not "at war." period. end of story.

you can't fight a war against 19 dead guys.

Posted by darladoon at 11/05/2007 @ 12:23am
The argument that Bush would just give this guy a recess appointment is a lousy one. The Senate has a job to do - advise and consent, not roll over and play dead. If they stand firm, they can prevent a recess appointment. If the MAJORITY members on the committee don't stand up for what they believe in now, they'll just find themselves bogged down in oversight hearings all over again. Everything they've accomplished will have been for naught.

Posted by BLUEGEORGIA 11/04/2007 @ 9:58pm

Nice to see there's at least one more democrat in the state of Georgia besides myself. Hey, after seeing what Bush's appointee who is supposed to be protecting us consumers from internationally shipped goods has done, it's a slam dunk that whomever Bush chooses for the AG slot, that person is going to be a loyal Bush follower instead of a real AG.

Bush can't choose anything other than completely loyal (loyal to Bush, not the citizens of the U.S.) F-ups who will do exactly as Cheney tells them to do. Everyone he has appointed so far has either tried to make the government appear corrupt, non-supportive to the people of the U.S., or incompetant. This is by design. It's the neoconservative way to destroy the government. Get people to lose trust in the government by way of cronyism. That way, the rethugs get rich and destroy the government at the same time.

In the end, the rich who own the private sector will completely take over and we can kiss our constitution good-bye.

Posted by Wolfgang1 at 11/05/2007 @ 07:25am
Thanks Wolf. There are plenty of us here.

I'm not not sure if you're talking about Nancy Nord, the acting CPSC chair who opposes legislation to create a stronger and a more well funded CPSC, or Michael Baroody, the CPSC nominee who would be another fox in the henhouse, or Andrew von Eshenbach, who has done little to protect consumer from foreign drugs, chinese seafood, and food additives. Regardless, I guess the argument fits.

The problem is that there is little downside for these appointees. Take Ken Tomlinson. He was forced out of the CPB for committing crimes on the job, but he suffered little consequence. In fact, he was rewarded with another appointment at the Broadcast Board of Governors (and suprise, suprise, he was violating federal rules again). The easy thing for these people to do is just leave when they've over-stayed their welcome. Then, they get replaced by someone who is not much different, and the cycle begins again.

Such is the case with the Attorney General. Michael Mukasey would be nothing more than Alberto Gonzales II. If we're not going to demand that better people fill these positions, what's the point of going through of going through all the trouble of getting rid of the corrupt ones in the first place?

If there are Democrats in Georgia, there can be a spine in our Democratic Congress. Granted, you don't see much of either one, but if try hard enough, you can find them. I suggest the Senate Judiciary Committee start looking for theirs (yes, you, Feinstein and Schumer).

Posted by blueGeorgia at 11/05/2007 @ 08:13am
Torturer Mukasey should not be considered for Attorney General for alot of reasons - he doesn't support the 3-branch American form of Government.

But Torture is one of my number one issues, I do not want the Government to have the power to Torture people. My top two issues are Torture and Iran - the 2 main building blocks in the Authoritarians plan to use to re-make America into a Hell.

Torture is a power the US Government should not have. You can't trust the Government with excessive power. Where are the Conservatives who supposedly believe in "Limited Government?"

Torture has 2 unstated objectives, to terrify the Government's critics and to train monsters so they will obey any order.

How long till some kid waterboards his little brother, and somebody dies because waterboarding is no big deal? How long till the Secret Service is forced to look the other way when someone says "The President should be waterboarded", because waterboarding is no big deal.

Where are you, Decent Conservatives? And where are the Democrats who are willing to stand up for what is right and keep another Torturer from getting the OK from Congress. America has a very, very serious problem on our hands. The Government will not be content to "only torture foreigners who really are terrorists". In a Republican Authoritarian America, whether you are Liberal Moderate or Conservative, you - your family - your friends - your kids - will be getting sucked into the system and disappearing. Where are the Conservatives who believe in Limited Government?

Posted by conshame at 11/05/2007 @ 08:52am
Whoa! Could I have read correctly? Mr. Nichols wrote that Gonzalez was the worst AG since who??? What have you been smoking, sir? The modern day Republicans bow to no one when lining up to accept the Most Appalling Attorney General award. Does Mr. Nichols seriously think that that Coolidge stooge could possibly have stooped to such depths of cynical corruption as John Mitchell did (who, lest we forget, actually served time; can we get a round of applause?) or be as seriously concerned with perverting the spirit and letter of the law as was Ed Meese? I think NOT! Shame, shame, SHAME on you, Mr. Nichols, for ignoring these giants of jurisprudent infamy.

Posted by bookmanjb at 11/05/2007 @ 09:17am
Well, the die is cast, anyway....

With Schumer and Feinstein, you can bet there are atleast another 3-5 Dems who'll vote for Mukasey (Lieberman, of course; Nelson; etc.) and maybe, but doubtful with Specter's endorsement, one Republican who'd vote against him (Hagel, but again, just maybe).

So end of the day, it'll be something like 56-43 (always somebody missing or sick).

Posted by Mask at 11/05/2007 @ 10:04am
The reason Mukasey is worse is that he is a rightwing Zionist.

Posted by torquemada at 11/05/2007 @ 11:41am
ed meese worse than gonzalez? that's the most outrageous claim of the day, and it's only 8:45 pacific time.....

Posted by darladoon at 11/05/2007 @ 11:49am
The zionists must be stopped. Am I the only one that thinks war with Iran is not such a great idea? Russia and China will get involved, and no one, not even Israel, will come out looking pretty.

Looks like Schumer on Feinstein are showing their true colors, as well. Torture and WWIII are fine, just so long as Israel comes out on top.

These people are evil. I never took much stock in the Biblical prophesies, until recently. When are we going to stop sponsoring the Evil Ones?

Posted by DejaVu at 11/05/2007 @ 12:30pm
Posted by MARKCANYON 11/05/2007 @ 12:08pm

MARKCANYON reading aloud from his newest book "My Struggle"!

heheh

Posted by Mask at 11/05/2007 @ 1:09pm
So now we are going to have one more Jew running our country

you should qualify that as "one more Right Wing Jew"......there's a difference between us northern california tree-hugging, herbalist, amateur-mycologist, dope-smoking, hippie jews.....and those guys over there in aipac.....

Posted by darladoon at 11/05/2007 @ 1:38pm
Posted by DARLADOON 11/05/2007 @ 1:38pm

DARLA, didn't you read what MARK posted? Haven't you read what he's posted in the past about THE HOLOCAUST?

Allow me--

"BLOG | Posted 10/05/2007 @ 5:23pm Prison Reformers Finally Set Free by Matthew Blake

"For one bright moment that came to view well enough in Europe when there were no people of color to confuse the picture. Then the right people, for once, were locked up, and put on Death Row, and sent to gas chamber. For a short moment the picture was clear and honest folks knew what to do."----Posted by MARKCANYON 10/06/2007 @ 1:15pm

DD, don't you realize what you're dealing with???

Posted by Mask at 11/05/2007 @ 1:44pm
Posted by DARLADOON 11/05/2007 @ 1:38pm

second what mask said...he'd have your poor "northern california tree-hugging, herbalist, amateur-mycologist, dope-smoking, hippie jew" posterior in a gas shower...

oh, scuse me, MARK is a holocaust denier...not sure what he'd do to you...and thats not even throwing in "african american" or "lesbian"...

this guy is a nazi...and proud of it...

at least i respect his honesty...until it comes to holocaust denial...but how can a nazi be honest about that? lol...

Posted by ibbleblibble at 11/05/2007 @ 2:25pm
So end of the day, it'll be something like 56-43 (always somebody missing or sick).

Posted by MASK 11/05/2007 @ 10:04am

or campaigning.................

Posted by frosty zoom at 11/05/2007 @ 2:29pm
Posted by MARKCANYON 11/05/2007 @ 2:33pm

ROFLMAO!

you ARE an aryan satanist, arent you!? hail thor! trapaziod!

DARLA - stay away from this one...a very very very bad boy...

Posted by ibbleblibble at 11/05/2007 @ 2:49pm
Posted by MARKCANYON 11/05/2007 @ 2:48pm

oh...my sincere apologies, mark. where did i get it in my head that you were a holocaust denier?

well...i may indeed be evil, MARK, but i'm opositionally defiantly evil...lol...so WATCH OUT!

har har har!

Posted by ibbleblibble at 11/05/2007 @ 2:52pm
your kind sells us the rope. God bless you, idiots

i don't sell anything, i just give it away

"take what you need, and share the rest" as they say....

Posted by darladoon at 11/05/2007 @ 2:54pm
or campaigning.................

Posted by FROSTY ZOOM 11/05/2007 @ 2:29pm

Naw...they (Hillary, Obama, Dodd, Biden) try it, and the bloggers will eat them alive!

Posted by Mask at 11/05/2007 @ 4:03pm
at least i respect his honesty...until it comes to holocaust denial...but how can a nazi be honest about that? lol...----Posted by IBBLEBLIBBLE 11/05/2007 @ 2:25pm

Kind of feel the same way, IBB. MARKHIMMLER is atleast HONEST about his anti-Semitism, even approval of the Holocaust.

Of course that merely assures us of the liklihood that he's a junior in high school (or less). Sort of like Beavis is he was a member of the Hitler Youth!

heheh

Posted by Mask at 11/05/2007 @ 4:05pm
"The president doesn't stand above the law. But the law emphatically includes the Constitution."

The very essence of law is being judged by a neutral third-party. John Locke considered it the essence of tyranny when someone is able to sit as judge of their own case. Bush is asserting a phony right to be the judge in his own case.

Of course that's not surprising since Bush is a tyrannical, piece of shit, war criminal.

Posted by cmarshall at 11/05/2007 @ 4:16pm
Posted by MARKCANYON 11/05/2007 @ 4:20pm

Hey, MARK....do you usually sit by yourself in the lunch-room?

Posted by Mask at 11/05/2007 @ 4:39pm
Odd? WILL defending PONTI?!!!?!?!?!?

LOL!

Posted by MASK 11/04/2007 @ 9:47pm

If you think that's funny cumbuckets, I'd defend you if there were ever just cause.

Posted by Will C. at 11/05/2007 @ 4:56pm
Posted by MARKCANYON 11/05/2007 @ 4:20pm

oh i hit the nail on the head, didnt i? MOOHAHAHA!

black ole sun!

i'm actually pretty darned honest myself, marky darky...

cept when i'm lying...

Posted by ibbleblibble at 11/05/2007 @ 5:13pm
Posted by MARKCANYON 11/05/2007 @ 4:20pm

a few things i've learned about satanists in general and nazi occultists especially...

1. they are evil, regardless of what they claim 2. they spell and capitalize almost perfectly, take great pride in such... 3. they love to prove how much smarter they are... 4. when they meet their superiors and their superiors disagree with/oppose them...they are capable of the most vile, well spelled, gramatically correct, rage filled venom imaginable...

poor luciferian nazi boy...

you'll be ok...one day it'll all seem like a bad dream...

TOTAL WAR!!!!

har har...yukity yuk....

Posted by ibbleblibble at 11/05/2007 @ 5:42pm
Posted by WILL C. 11/05/2007 @ 4:56pm

Oh, I doubt it WILL.

Same reason you need me to be female...probably same reason you support Hillary....same reason your girlfriend looks at you oddly sometimes....(and same reason, those calls to your Mom are awkward)...

same reason you'd cozy upto PONTI if it was ME poking at him with a stick.

Posted by Mask at 11/05/2007 @ 7:42pm
Posted by IBBLEBLIBBLE 11/05/2007 @ 5:42pm

What's bizarre about MARKGOERING is....he claims to be a LEFTIST!

No fascist conservative he...he's a honest-to-gosh "national SOCIALIST"!

Posted by Mask at 11/05/2007 @ 7:43pm
I wanna give a shoutout to Dirty Harry and Clay Face Pelosi! Thanks for not going for impeachment, not stopping Mukasey, and for giving Bush a blank check in a few days for the war!

Posted by woodyee at 11/05/2007 @ 8:18pm
Posted by MASK 11/05/2007 @ 7:43pm

yeah...national socialist = nazi...

i guess he thinks that since the right is crammed up aipac's rectum the left is fertile ground for whatever...

dont know how he concieves splitting the lefty jews and attracting the ultra righty racists, but i guess we can all have our dreams/fantasies...

he drips some great vitriol, however...

Posted by ibbleblibble at 11/05/2007 @ 8:18pm
Posted by IBBLEBLIBBLE 11/05/2007 @ 8:18pm

He is aiming for a bit of a LIMITED demographic....virulently anti-Semitic (not just anti-Zionist) "liberals" who think that we need universal health care AND that the Holocaust was a "good start"!

I think the sum total, nation-wide should fit in a good-sized VW micro-bus with a peace symbol and a swastika painted on the side!

heheh

Posted by Mask at 11/05/2007 @ 9:23pm
Posted by MASK 11/05/2007 @ 9:23pm |

well - i hope he doesn't go bye bye...

he's fun...

HEY EVERYBODY - DONT BE TOO MEAN TO THE BOYD RICE WANNABE NAZI GUY. HE'S FUN TO HAVE AROUND.

Posted by ibbleblibble at 11/05/2007 @ 9:37pm
Posted by MADLIB 11/05/2007 @ 9:44pm

aw come on! a real live honest to god nazi! here in the blog response pits of the nation...

thats like a giant panda or siberian snow tiger in an american zoo!

you dont just throw that back in the water, man...you treasure it and stoke its ego and keep it as long as you can...

true unrepentant self realized evil is special, rare, and not to be taken for granted...

Posted by ibbleblibble at 11/05/2007 @ 10:39pm
Posted by IBBLEBLIBBLE 11/05/2007 @ 10:39pm

well, i ignored the fool a long time ago. i'm just not that morbid.

Posted by frosty zoom at 11/05/2007 @ 10:54pm
Posted by FRANKGRITS 11/05/2007 @ 11:53pm |

ah - i knew there was something i was forgetting! thanks...lol.

the nazi aint aludra, by the way. completely different style.

Posted by ibbleblibble at 11/06/2007 @ 12:06am
Posted by MADLIB 11/06/2007 @ 12:11am

LOL

Posted by ibbleblibble at 11/06/2007 @ 12:22am
Posted by FRANKGRITS 11/05/2007 @ 11:49pm

Hey the first Queen/King President-- They don't need no stinken Clinton-- Yes, the reptiles are that jaded that Guili is the card the new con supporters, servicers of dic'tator philosophy, want...because he's tortured and will torture again. Torture = fear, fear = hate, and after all, that's what the world needs now and hasway too little of...

Posted by hsuBfools at 11/06/2007 @ 12:53am
RIO BRAVO:

God damn it. You stole my line and are using it for EVIL! Stop that, you right-wingnutter.

Posted by jorcheim at 11/06/2007 @ 11:40am
Mucasey tells Schumer that if Congress makes waterboarding illegal, he'll enforce the law. As if Bush wouldn't veto such legislation if it came before him. How dumb does Schumer think we are?

It's simple: as long as Congress is afraid of Bush, it will give him everything he wants. We can't hope for anything else.

Posted by Villard at 11/06/2007 @ 12:01pm
I am beside myself that Feinstein and Schumer let this happen. I actually hope that bribery was involved (hey, Agnew was offered $1500 thirty years ago, that's pretty good money!), as opposed to complete and utter lack of backbone. At this point I'll take venality over such consistently demonstrated weakness.

I have to ask, even though I'll probably regret doing so... Why is Masky (Zorro, Maskerina, She Who Must Not Be Named) now referred to as "cumbuckets", Will?

Posted by Rapaport at 11/06/2007 @ 1:55pm
Posted by RIO BRAVO 11/05/2007 @ 11:44pm

The Doctor recommends you take 30 Nembutal and call me in the morning, freak show.

Really, grow the fuck up, putz.

Posted by Dr Decibels at 11/06/2007 @ 2:47pm
Oh, I doubt it WILL.

Same reason you need me to be female...probably same reason you support Hillary....same reason your girlfriend looks at you oddly sometimes....(and same reason, those calls to your Mom are awkward)...

Posted by MASK 11/05/2007 @ 7:42pm

You forgot to mention the real reason cumbuckets. When would you ever provide the just cause?

That would require qualities you don't have

Posted by Will C. at 11/06/2007 @ 10:45pm