Boards > Current Events > NEWS: George Bush Actually Compromises

FearTheReaper

NEWSWIRE

I'm lost

SEP 16, 2007 09:45 PM

POLITICS: George Bush Actually Compromises

You read that headline correctly. It seems our president has actually compromised on his nominee for Attorney General. I, for one, dont know what to do right now. It is like the floor has disappeared from underneath me. This will take some time to recover from.

It appears George has given the nod to retired Judge Michael Mukasey. He was nominated to the bench by Ronald Reagan in 1988 and was chief judge for the Southern District of New York until September 2006. Most shockingly of all, he appears to not be a completely ideologically driven asshole.

According to many experts, he is independent-minded, very experienced and smart. Weird, right? It only took the president six years to start nominating people who are actually qualified. Although the real reason for the sudden switch is because Bush knows that Democrats now control Congress and will not confirm an unqualified or partisan nominee.

So, who is this guy? Lets start with the pros:

Mukasey ruled against the government in the case of former Congressional aide Susan Lindauer. She was charged with assisting Iraqi intelligence officials. The Government wanted to force Lindauer to take anti-psychotic medications so she would be competent to stand trial. Judge Mukasey gave that option a thumbs down. Mukasey expressed humanitarian concerns about the force-feeding of the medication. Alberto Gonzales would have recommended an enema.

When New York City was seizing the vehicles of people arrested for drunk driving, prostitution, drug and gun crimes, Mukasey ordered prompt hearings. The city was forced to give back 6,000 cars. Gonzales would have tried to seize their homes and their feet.

Most important were Mukaseys rulings in the prosecution of Jose Padilla. Padilla is a US citizen who was convicted last month of aiding terrorists. In 2002, the administration designated Padilla an enemy combatant and claimed he was not entitled to a trial in a civilian court. He was not allowed access to anyone, including an attorney. The administration also refused to charge him with a crime. He was basically fucked.

A New York lawyer filed a lawsuit on Padillas behalf, which was assigned to Judge Mukasey. Mukasey rejected the administrations claim that Padilla should not be allowed an attorney and that he should not be allowed to look at the evidence against him. And Mukasey was severely critical of the administration when they dragged their feet. It is one of the only times since 9/11 that anyone has put a check on Bushs belligerent grab for power. And this was in 2002, when no one dared to question any action the administration took in its fight against terrorism.

These are all good signs for the new nominee. They indicate that he will not be a political hack like Alberto Gonzales. He will follow the rule of law and the Constitution rather than the word of Bush. After Alberto we desperately need an Attorney General who will be independent of the White House and enforce the law, even if it will damage the administration politically. Mukasey may be that man.

Or is he? Now the cons:

Mukasey is a really good friend of Rudy Giuliani and now serves as a judiciary advisor to his campaign. Rudy has a history of running roughshod over defendants rights.

Mukasey is also a big supporter of the Patriot Act. In a Wall Street Journal Op-Ed in 2004, he mocked librarians for challenging the provision that allowed the government to seize library records. He also argued in favor of sneak and peak warrants, which are secret warrants that do not allow a person to challenge a search before the fact.

There is also the scary side of his Padilla ruling. Mukasey ruled President Bush had the authority to detain American citizens as "enemy combatants" without charging them with a crime. You can see how that might be somewhat disturbing considering we have a Constitution and whatnot. On the other hand, Alberto Gonzales is okay with killing babies who are Muslim, so this is a step up.

So, Mukasey is definitely a conservative judge, but that is to be expected from Bush. He is a huge step up from the incompetent and partisan Gonzales and far better than Bushs first choice, Ted Olsen. Last week Democrats told Bush they would not confirm Olsen and to forget about him. Senator Chuck Schumer then recommended Mukasey. It looks like Bush is coming to grips with his lack of total power, at least a little.

And because some Democrats support Mukasey, conservatives are worried.

Brian Burch, president of the Catholic-based advocacy group Fidelis, said he started getting calls early Saturday from members of his group and other conservative groups who were worried that Bush was getting ready to nominate Mukasey.

"His federal judicial record has been at times hostile to the issues that we care and have concern about, like abortion," Burch said.

He is backed and supported by far left wing of the Democratic Party. Any time you have a person with those persons backing him it gives us pause."

That's a great way to make a choice. See who someone else likes.

Regardless, Democrats should still aggressively question Mukasey about how far the Presidents authority reaches, why he believes police can use secret warrants to search homes and why we can be detained without charges. Either way, we finally wont have a retard in charge of the Justice Department. That will be a nice change.

FearTheReaper will be appearing this Tuesday in the Comedy Death Ray show at the Upright Citizens Brigade theater.

Ascanius

USA

October 2006

SEP 17, 2007 09:08 AM

This article is totally bias.

JoLeigh

SUICIDEGIRL

Florida, USA

SEP 17, 2007 09:14 AM

its sad if he does do anything remotely ok.... on a liberal standpoint
that we end up being shocked...

YEAH TEAM USA

scylis

USA

November 2004

SEP 17, 2007 09:18 AM

this is not the dawn of April, so this can't be a hoax. wtf? he's actually an actual conservative? not some loyalist hack in a thin disguise waiting for his chance to suckle at the teat of his master? not that i'm overly fond of conservatives, but he's really got his own opinions on things?

Rod Serling better not show up and start into an opening monologue...

scarletboi

Tampa, FL

January 2004

SEP 17, 2007 09:20 AM

Ascanius said:
This article is totally bias.

I, uh, take it you've never read FearTheReaper's posts before?

Ascanius

USA

October 2006

SEP 17, 2007 09:26 AM

scarletboi said:

Ascanius said:
This article is totally bias.

I, uh, take it you've never read FearTheReaper's posts before?

Sorry. I forgot to .

Pip

Framingham, MA

OLD SKOOL

SEP 17, 2007 09:31 AM

Bush may be compromissing but this is yet again a case of the Democrats bending over and taking one from behind. I can't believe they dropped his name to begin with.

He's not an incompetent and he is actually qualified for his position, but these are not places we should be compromising toward. These are places we should be beginning from. A list of acceptable nominees that gets handed to bush from the democrats should start at those 2 "principles", not go "fine we'll take any one of these 3 not complete assholes."

Are resposibility and accountability too much to ask for in the 21st century?

KtheTwentyThird

Ypsilanti, MI

March 2005

SEP 17, 2007 09:40 AM

Pip said:
Are resposibility and accountability too much to ask for in the 21st century?

Not from around these parts, are you?

sy_old

Columbia, MO

March 2007

SEP 17, 2007 09:47 AM

Pip said:
He's not an incompetent and he is actually qualified for his position, but these are not places we should be compromising toward. These are places we should be beginning from. A list of acceptable nominees that gets handed to bush from the democrats should start at those 2 "principles", not go "fine we'll take any one of these 3 not complete assholes."

Are resposibility and accountability too much to ask for in the 21st century?

+1

Keri

SUICIDEGIRL

Virginia, USA

SEP 17, 2007 09:56 AM

Ascanius said:
This article is totally bias.

Where are the reqirements that say all articles must be un-biased?

perlpunk

Denver, CO

November 2003

SEP 17, 2007 10:01 AM

George Bush Actually Compromises???? my ass, per the norm this is just politics. the headline is shit, much as I'm sure we'll see this chosen official is in the coming days. nothing has changed, just a name.

zarth

Seattle, WA

December 2004

SEP 17, 2007 10:10 AM

Apparently the sarcasm meters are broken today, Ascanius.

In any event, this is actually the second compromise in Bush's cabinet. Rumsfeld's apparatchik replacement - what's his name, Gates - was the first. I think even the White House is starting to realize to the party's finally over.

And Mukasey doesn't sound too bad.

meatpieboy

Korea, D.P.R.

June 2004

SEP 17, 2007 10:44 AM

Zarth said:
Apparently the sarcasm meters are broken today, Ascanius.

In any event, this is actually the second compromise in Bush's cabinet. Rumsfeld's apparatchik replacement - what's his name, Gates - was the first. I think even the White House is starting to realize to the party's finally over.

And Mukasey doesn't sound too bad.

This response is totally bias.

FTR, thanks for the datas. Your point about "making a choice" is the first thing I thought of when I was reading about this, too. It's as though the right-wing sees any compromise as anathema. If the liberals might accept it, it must be bad. What, do they view this as an all-out conquest, where all is lost unless all is won?

... What? They do?

shapeshifter23

San Francisco, CA

September 2005

SEP 17, 2007 10:45 AM

I smell a hidden agenda...

SPOILERS! (Click to view)

Stiles

Oakland, CA

November 2002

SEP 17, 2007 10:55 AM

Pip said:
Bush may be compromissing but this is yet again a case of the Democrats bending over and taking one from behind. I can't believe they dropped his name to begin with.

He's not an incompetent and he is actually qualified for his position, but these are not places we should be compromising toward. These are places we should be beginning from. A list of acceptable nominees that gets handed to bush from the democrats should start at those 2 "principles", not go "fine we'll take any one of these 3 not complete assholes."

Are resposibility and accountability too much to ask for in the 21st century?

Welcome to the wonderful world of intentionally lowered expectations.

chikinhammr

Orlando, FL

April 2006

SEP 17, 2007 11:04 AM

Zarth said:
Apparently the sarcasm meters are broken today, Ascanius.

In any event, this is actually the second compromise in Bush's cabinet. Rumsfeld's apparatchik replacement - what's his name, Gates - was the first. I think even the White House is starting to realize to the party's finally over.

And Mukasey doesn't sound too bad.

I hear that he smells like smoked salmon.

zarth

Seattle, WA

December 2004

SEP 17, 2007 11:05 AM

meatpieboy said:

Zarth said:
Apparently the sarcasm meters are broken today, Ascanius.

In any event, this is actually the second compromise in Bush's cabinet. Rumsfeld's apparatchik replacement - what's his name, Gates - was the first. I think even the White House is starting to realize to the party's finally over.

And Mukasey doesn't sound too bad.

This response is totally bias.

FTR, thanks for the datas. Your point about "making a choice" is the first thing I thought of when I was reading about this, too. It's as though the right-wing sees any compromise as anathema. If the liberals might accept it, it must be bad. What, do they view this as an all-out conquest, where all is lost unless all is won?

... What? They do?

You're bunny ears are totally bias.

Heracleitus

Arlington, VA

May 2005

SEP 17, 2007 11:12 AM

I'll give it to the Republicans in Congress. They must have giant balls. Bullying Democrats for the past six years (not that the Dems put up a lot of fight) by crying partisan every time they didn't cow to each and every one of their demands and then turning around and questioning this pretty conservative judge just because it appears to have bipartisan support. That's brilliant.

Gylrek

Chula Vista, CA

August 2007

SEP 17, 2007 12:13 PM

you should someday read the constitution not have it read for you. it's not up to the congress to suggest people for cabinet positions . It would be better if he just left the position vacant. then you liberals wouldn't have anyone to bitch about

FearTheReaper

NEWSWIRE

I'm lost

SEP 17, 2007 12:32 PM

Gylrek said:
you should someday read the constitution not have it read for you. it's not up to the congress to suggest people for cabinet positions . It would be better if he just left the position vacant. then you liberals wouldn't have anyone to bitch about

Anyway, like I said, conservatives are bitching about Bush's new pick.....

Admiral_Pants

Austin, TX

May 2004

SEP 17, 2007 12:48 PM

Gylrek said:
you should someday read the constitution not have it read for you. it's not up to the congress to suggest people for cabinet positions . It would be better if he just left the position vacant. then you liberals wouldn't have anyone to bitch about

If you had read the Constitution, you might have come across this bit:

Article II, Section 2, paragraph 2:

The President shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.

Even if you take the position that the "advice" part is meant to be exercised after the nomination has been made, it seems sensible for the Senate to tell the President, "We're certainly not going to consent to this asshole, so don't even bother."

Ascanius

USA

October 2006

SEP 17, 2007 12:52 PM

Gylrek said:
you should someday read the constitution not have it read for you. it's not up to the congress to suggest people for cabinet positions . It would be better if he just left the position vacant. then you liberals wouldn't have anyone to bitch about

Yes, as an East Coast liberal, I always have my house boy read the constitution to me.

Tool.

/EDIT Admiral_pants is quicker on the draw then I am.

hadees

Austin, TX

December 2003

SEP 17, 2007 01:22 PM

Keri said:

Ascanius said:
This article is totally bias.

Where are the reqirements that say all articles must be un-biased?

Ascanius

USA

October 2006

SEP 17, 2007 01:23 PM

hadees said:

Keri said:

Ascanius said:
This article is totally bias.

Where are the reqirements that say all articles must be un-biased?

Hippy.

ericwine

Charlotte Hall, MD

January 2007

SEP 17, 2007 01:25 PM

Zarth said:
Apparently the sarcasm meters are broken today, Ascanius.

In any event, this is actually the second compromise in Bush's cabinet. Rumsfeld's apparatchik replacement - what's his name, Gates - was the first. I think even the White House is starting to realize to the party's finally over.

And Mukasey doesn't sound too bad.

There's definitely a sense that reality is breaking through the voices in Bush's head a little more often. Not often enough.
You're right about Gates, that was definitely a case of giving a key job to someone competent instead of to a hack - which seems to be the case here. A friend in the Air Force tells me that Gates is popular with the troops where Rumsfeld was pretty much universally despised by them. Hopefully, Mukasey will have a similar effect on the Justice Department.

BOARDS:

TOPICS:

NEWSWIRE

I'm lost

SEP 16, 2007 09:45 PM

USA

October 2006

SEP 17, 2007 09:08 AM

SUICIDEGIRL

Florida, USA

SEP 17, 2007 09:14 AM

USA

November 2004

SEP 17, 2007 09:18 AM

Tampa, FL

January 2004

SEP 17, 2007 09:20 AM

USA

October 2006

SEP 17, 2007 09:26 AM

Framingham, MA

OLD SKOOL

SEP 17, 2007 09:31 AM

Ypsilanti, MI

March 2005

SEP 17, 2007 09:40 AM

Columbia, MO

March 2007

SEP 17, 2007 09:47 AM

SUICIDEGIRL

Virginia, USA

SEP 17, 2007 09:56 AM

Denver, CO

November 2003

SEP 17, 2007 10:01 AM

zarth

Seattle, WA

December 2004

SEP 17, 2007 10:10 AM

meatpieboy

Korea, D.P.R.

June 2004

SEP 17, 2007 10:44 AM

San Francisco, CA

September 2005

SEP 17, 2007 10:45 AM

Oakland, CA

November 2002

SEP 17, 2007 10:55 AM

chikinhammr

Orlando, FL

April 2006

SEP 17, 2007 11:04 AM

zarth

Seattle, WA

December 2004

SEP 17, 2007 11:05 AM

Arlington, VA

May 2005

SEP 17, 2007 11:12 AM

Chula Vista, CA

August 2007

SEP 17, 2007 12:13 PM

NEWSWIRE

I'm lost

SEP 17, 2007 12:32 PM

Austin, TX

May 2004

SEP 17, 2007 12:48 PM

USA

October 2006

SEP 17, 2007 12:52 PM

Austin, TX

December 2003

SEP 17, 2007 01:22 PM

USA

October 2006

SEP 17, 2007 01:23 PM

Charlotte Hall, MD

January 2007