Republicans, what if your weapons of mass tyranny fall into Democrat hands?

[Le Jacquelope]

All I'm saying is, if the American people really wanted to advance the Democrat agenda they would have taken both houses in sufficient numbers to override a veto, not just a few districts and states.

Did the Republican "revolution" in 1994 create a veto-proof majority?

 

[naughtycakes]

We do not elect the CIA or the FBI or any of the other departments that do that style of work. Like it or not, it is here to stay.

How I feel about it will change nothing.

This may be true, but the Bush administration has done more to turn our country's government into a third-world debacle than most people realize. It has consistantly fired career civil servants who did not toe the line and replaced them with subservient cronies - i.e. the whole mess with former Attorney General Alberto "Torture-Chief" Gonzalez.

Bush & Co. have been trying to turn our government into a similacrum of the PRI in Mexico, where one-party rule crippled the system for 70 years.

And you're right, the leaders of the CIA and FBI are not elected, they're appointed, and look how well Bush listened to Richard Clarke, a man who served under Reagan, Bush I, Clinton and then W, the only man who stepped up and apologized for 9/11 happening on his watch.

He had been trying to get W to pay attention to bin Laden since the day Bush came into office, but W was too busy with his photo ops in Crawford to even pretend to give a fuck.