Find one tiny, substantiated piece of proof (not conjecture or third-party related recollections of conversations) that the President ordered Gonzalez to lie under oath, and yes, I would call for his resignation as well.

Suborning perjury is itself a form of perjury, too.

And please, don’t bring up the SOTU speech. Whether it was a lie, a mis-characterization, selective picking of intelligence, or an honest belief at that moment in time will fill many, many scholarly books for years after he leaves office.

I am not sure why anyone is having an issue with this.

If you believe (as I do) that getting lying under oath should result in a public official such as the AG or President stepping down for the good of the office and the country, how could you take any other position?

Either you believe that ignoring an oath is serious, or you don’t. And it was mainly the Right and conservatives that took that position during the Clinton scandal (although a few Dems did too, in fairness).

It seems hypocritical to me that now there are those on the Right that say there is no reason for Gonzalez to resign (though that groups is shrinking by the hour). I was simply calling out THAT group.

And how does believing that in any way relate to Lewinsky herself?

If you called for Clinton to step down, you have to call for Gonzalez to step down

What?

That’s like saying Clinton lied so Monica Lewinsky should never be allowed in the White House again.

You too are guilty of not reading.

My first post was self-referential, talking about myself and others who had generally called for Clinton to resign for lying, and was not pointed at anyone in particular.

Post 3 was a reply to someone criticizing me and telling me to do something I had already done, and therefore they were being stupid.

Post 4 was an in-kind response to Pyst saying exactly what he had said to me, for which I apologized.

However, I won’t apologize for calling you stupid for not reading the posts as written, and trying to misrepresent them.

AR post #1 – “…expose yourself as nothing but a pandering, rudderless, apologist, partisan hack.”

AR post #2 – “…you are nothing more than a wannabe college Communist/Socialist/Radical, pining that the Sixties are no more.”

AR post #3 – “That way you don’t look so stupid.”

AR post #4 – “So F*** u 2.”

AR post #5 – “… your use of coded profanity is no excuse for my retaliation in kind. I apologize.”

One out of five of AR’s comments wasn’t a pejorative / ad hominem laced personal attack… it was an appology. A definate improvement from previous threads.

AR – How ’bout just knocking off the personal attacks and try commenting on the topic at hand? Just asking.

The comment by jdledell asked if I was going to comment on the subject of Shaun’s original post, which was Gonzalez, and which I commented on. So, my comment to him was direct, and on the point, as was my original post (after a dig at Chris).

So F*** u 2.

Looks like you are doing pretty good on the stupid front yourself, gasbag.

When we see our laws broken, and recieve what amounts to “yeah I did it, so what” from the president and his entire cabinet we got a problem. That’s called anarchy/monarchy at the highest level, and the patriots of this country of all political stripes should be out in the streets shutting things down untill the law is applied to ALL, not just those without supreme powers.
You are advocating the president as long as he’s of your liking is allowed to piss on our constituion, well f*** you, and take yourself to some craphole dictatorship/monarchy if you like that type of governing because this is the US and we do democracy and rule of law here. Maybe Myanmar is more your speed, but getting W and Co. in power there might be a stretch without all the zombies to vote him in, and the army to play with.

Do you have a point you wish to make about the content of Shaun’s posting?

Yep, and I made it in my first post. Try reading first, commenting second. That way you don’t look so stupid.

BTW, I have always respected Andy Card, so its disheartening to see the extent that he was willing to go to prove his loyalty to Bush. Gonzales reminds me of Smithers from the Simpsons – he’s the ultimate sycophant without a shred of integrity. The Senate is planning a vote of no-confidence- and if the GOP continues to support Gonzales, I hope the Dems use it in the next election to widen their majority.

There is no real disruption of civil society

See, told you before that you are nothing more than a wannabe college Communist/Socialist/Radical, pining that the Sixties are no more.

The Revolution passed you buy (happened before you were born), and it wasn’t much of a Revolution anyway. All the old Radicals now drive Volvo’s, have diversified portfolios, and love a good bottle of California Cabernet.

The problem is that no one pays attention. There is no real disruption of civil society, and there needs to be.

Does the President having no concern for the law or the Constitution not concern you at all? Shouldn’t we at least be calling for an investigation and possible impeachment proceedings?

We need a little “democracy promotion” at home, and badly.

That said, for all those (and I am one) that said the biggest transgression of Clinton was his failure to resign after it became known he lied to the Grand Jury and the American public, well, the shoe is on the other foot now.

If you called for Clinton to step down, you have to call for Gonzalez to step down, or expose yourself as nothing but a pandering, rudderless, apologist, partisan hack.

So, Gonzalez, be a man, do the right thing, and step down for the dignity of the office, and of the country.