Sunday, March 25, 2007

Liberal Hypocrisy, part 10 to the 12th power.

Well, I wanted to try to get my feet sort of rewetted with the new interface, plus, I had a little rant on my chest. Soooooooooooooo, I decided to kill two birds with one stone.

I was listening to Bill O'reilly regurgitated today(Sunday) while making the rounds doing some chores. It seems he has a "liberal" guest host now, at least sometimes. This is fine. The topic today was the U.S. Attorney firing "scandal".

Personally, I don't care a whole lot one way or the other, up to the point the Dimocrats want to make political hay with this whole episode. Bush and Gonzales had the right to fire them for whatever reason. The fact they weren't happy with them is good enough for me. Of course, this isn't good enough for the Left. Most of these prosecutors, it seems according to the Gonzales version, weren't following administration guidlines on what they were supposed to be prosecuting. For instance, the Attorney in Arizona wouldn't prosecute any pot smuggling cases below 500 lbs. That's a whole lotta pot. One Attorney, Iglesias, I beleive, flat out refused to investigate voter fraud allegations, and admits that's why he was sacked.

O'reilly's point, and, I beleive, the point in general, is that unless the conduct involved approaches criminal behavior, then subpoenoing executive branch officials is uncalled for. I don't know anybody that's really trying to say that firing these guys was any kind of criminal act, for whatever reason. O'reilly's 2nd point is that if the public needs to know every nuance and decision of government, government will cease to function. Now, I'm not sure this is neccessarily a bad thing, but I think it's indisputably true. Government officials, including high government officials, need to be able to take advisement anonymously, and give directives on said advisement without constantly being subpoenaed by the beauracrat of the day.

President Bush has offered to have Karl Rove and Harriet Miers testify before the Senate Judiciary commitee without being under oath, and with no published transcript. Considering the whole Scooter Libby thingamajig, I can see why the Executive would be a little gunshy of appearing before a panel consisting of 11 of the most Liberal Senators in the Capital. Can you say "Perjury trap", I knew you could.

I know this is long, but, I promise I'm gonna get to the hypocrisy part.

Now, this Lefty cohost is screaming to high heavens that this meeting must have an "open" record. After all, it's the publics right to know what goes on here, so we can judge for ourselves. Got that?

Now, this Lefty lawyer dude comes on the show. He says that it's just wrong the way these prosecutors were singled out. Decisions on what to prosecute are left up to the discretion of the U.S. Attorney. These Attorney's along with Defense counsel meet in secret to determine whether or not individual cases should be brought to trial. It's not right to publicly or privately criticize their judgement?

See, I told ya I was gonna get there. U.S. Attorney's-absolutely critical they have secrecy in dealing with cases. Administration tasked with overseeing them-not so much. Maybe we outta shine a little "oversight" on these U.S. Attorney's and see how they fair, who was sending letters to whom, etc. After all, if we're going to bring the Whitehouse and AG's conduct into the light, shouldn't the prosecutors be held to the same standard? Shouldn't the public have a "right to know" what is and is not being prosecuted?

I could take the Left's arguments a whole lot more seriously if they weren't mutually exclusive, or inclusive, or only applied to their pet outrage of the day, week, month. The Administration needs to play hardball here, bigtime. These Attorney's need to be shown they are out of line.

I'm done now.