Even those at Freerepublic think Gonzo was pathetic today

[Quixote1818]

If they think he was pathetic then his performance must have been beyond belief bad!

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1820256/posts

[rasputin1952]

1. LOL...This post might be prophecy from FR...

"To: Lancey Howard

It doesn’t matter if Gonzales was pathetic or not. Gonzales may be a weak sister, but if Bush gives the dems Gonzales, he might as well give them his entire cabinet."


:rofl:

[NRaleighLiberal]

2. Wow....what an odd mix of responses in that thread!

Nice mix of a very few with some shred of decency, with an ample supply of psychopaths and nutcases!

[Quixote1818]

7. That was my take exactly. nt

[Kagemusha]

3. Good for Gonzales that their opinions don't matter, either

There is only one Decider.

[calimary]

4. Kind of you to be vigilant and notify us of this - it's most gratifying!

But I can't bring myself to go visit over there...

But thanks for the heads up.

[TahitiNut]

5. (Hmmm...) That means I'll have to re-examine my impressions. (Drat.)

:dunce:

[BearSquirrel2]

6. What gets me ...

What gets me is even if you believe Gonzalez how can you have any confidence in the guy. He apparently cannot remember any details of something that's VERY important!

So you say that these guys serve at the pleasure of the President. They say that the President can fire them for any reason. Except, the President didn't fire him. And if you listen to Gonzalez, apparently he didn't fire them either. He lays that at the feet of Karl Sampson. Did Gonzalez even bother to open a personnel file? And if the decision was up to the "senior team" in the justice department "which apparently didn't include Gonzalez" why do we have Harriet Meyers in the White House talking about firing ALL the U.S. Attorneys to avoid just this scenario?

So apparently the chain of command goes from Karl Sampson, bypasses the attorney general and goes up to Harriet Meyers? Well exactly who is in charge of the Justice Department? Does this guy remember ANYTHING he does.

Further, how can anyone be confident in Gonzalez's management style. He states that he was unhappy with these attorney's performance on "immigration" and "voter fraud" cases. Yet, he has failed to produce a single shred of evidence that the Justice Department ever asked these attorneys to focus on these areas. Apparently the "President" didn't make it clear exactly how he would like to be "pleasured". Is this what a good supervisor does. He knowingly lets his people act against management without communicating the organizations goals? Then fire them for failure to adhere to the unstated goals?

Even if you believe that the firings of these attorney's was appropriate, how can you stand behind such an incredibly SHITTY manager!!! His attitude seems to be he fired them, but he didn't really consider it very closely and he doesn't remember when he made those decisions and he never bothered to tell the attorneys in question what he wanted them to do.

Of course, if he had written letter stating:

"Dear Carol Lamb,

What the F**K are you doing investigating Republicans. You're making our party look like a corrupt bunch of ass munches. We're going to can your ass if you don't kill your investigation. Furthermore, we would like you to harass eligible minority voters under the pretense that they are trying to vote fraudulently. Please do this, it would "pleasure the President", and that of course is why you're here, not to enforce and protect the law. So roll up your sleeves, get on your knees and start "servicing". After a while you really don't notice the taste.

A Gonzalez
U.S. Attorney General
AKA Karl Roves Sock Puppet"


Now, if he had written a letter that said the same thing politely, would this make the nature of the scandal quite clear? And would this explain the absence of a letter asking the fired US Attorneys to meet the objectives of the attorney general?