Like the FBI….and the CIA…Dig it

I don’t believe I have ever witnessed a regime that will influence the (mis) direction of our country as much as this one. GW has appointed not one, but two supreme court justices, which greatly influences our civil rights, moral fiber and laws. He appointed the successor to Greenspan, which greatly impacts the financial direction of this country. Now the head of the CIA? Is the FBI next or has that already happened? If he could have got by with it, he would probably have appointed the new Pope. And by the way, these are all lifetime appointments. Is it just a coincidence that all of these people got too old at the same time? Hmmm?????????What’s up Doc? And I thought Nixon was bad.

17 Responses to “Like the FBI….and the CIA…Dig it”

  1. Well, he had already appointed Goss, the previous CIA head, to the post. Although there’s no term limit on CIA or FBI head, they both serve at the pleasure of the President. I believe there have been 19 (or is it 17?) heads of the CIA and the average tenure is 3 years.

    The problem isn’t that he’s been able to appoint these people — the problem is that he’s filled all of the positions with Bush loyalists: people who care more about supporting Bush’s policies than doing what’s best for the nation. People who want to use their traditionally non-partisan positions to wield political power and support the patronage system where big-money supporters get big-money government contracts. In the case of CIA and defense, many of these are classified so the money has little oversight, especially since the Republican Congress, constitutionally charged with oversight of the executive branch, has not issued one supoena in five years (contrast this with thousands issued to the previous administration).

    Goss went on a political purge at the CIA, they started questioning people’s political affliations whenever they disagreed with the President’s desired outcomes.

  2. “The problem isn’t that he’s been able to appoint these people — the problem is that he’s filled all of the positions with Bush loyalists: people who care more about supporting Bush’s policies than doing what’s best for the nation.”

    I agree TTop. Well put. That was the point I was trying to make. I did not remember the specifics on the CIA appointment. I was just saying he is attempting to secure his idealogoy for decades to come.

  3. With a Republican controlled House, Senate, and Executive they will try to make every change they can before the end of Bush’s term. They know it’s over for them after that. I expect a concerted effort to push harder these last days unless Bush and gang have to spend their energy defending the war.

    If the Democrats can win 15 seats in the house they say there will be some investigations into spying, pre-war intelligence and other investigations that Republicans have held up, possibly impeachment. I bet we are all voting.

  4. Anon, I agree each administration uses this tactic. However, have you ever seen so many crucual appointments made by one administration? That’s what I was getting at.

  5. No, I haven’t. Yes, you are right. And, how many times in history has all three branches been controlled by one party? Our government was set up with the idea of checks and balances part of which is a multi-party system. We know what happens in countries with one party rule.

  6. Here’s the type of hack that Bush appoints.

  7. #7 by Randalf the Grey

    I’m so proud to be a member of the left wing of MRamblerCentral. Most of the polls indicate a great awakening in our country
    since November of 2004. Let’s hope the voters can KEEP their eyes open until the mid-term elections in November.

  8. #8 by huskysooner

    It seems that MRCentral is the left wing central, RtG! Well, except for me (a weird mix of libertarian-conservative-bullmoose-type).

    I think all Presidents try to leverage the ideological future as much as possible. My problem is what TTop mentions, the buffoonery and/or cronyism, whether the horse-judge FEMA director, the SC nominee Harriet Meiers, or Julie Myers, the woefully unqualified head of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement and coincidentally (?) the niece of the at-the-time outgoing Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman.

  9. Bullmoose or whatever, we all seem to agree there is something wrong with our government. The People’s business should be the mandate of our government not the business of special interests. At least that’s how I thought it was supposed to work.

  10. I have never considered myself left wing (well, maybe in my 20’s). However, I agree with anon’s assesment of our current predicament.

  11. #11 by Randalf the Grey

    My dry sense of humor does not project well in this medium. I didn’t mean to apply the “L” word to any contributor to this blog.
    As far as I know, I could be the only Democrat in the bunch. And of course, we Democrats only want to raise your taxes so that
    the Republicans will have more money to steal.

    I think what anon and Sunn are saying is that they would like to see real, meaningful campaign finance reform. I also would like
    to see this. The McCain–Feingold bill, as originally proposed, would have accomplished this. The version of that bill that was
    finally signed into law was a very small baby step in the right direction. I don’t expect any more progress on this issue as long
    as Republicans control the house and/or the senate, especially since Sen. McCain is currently in campaign mode and pandering to
    the Republican base. Further, I don’t expect a Democratic congress would produce any progress on this issue either, UNLESS the
    people ( that would be us ) make it an important issue again.

  12. RTG, I didn’t think your comments were aimed directly at anyone in particular.
    With GW’s own party turning on him, there may be a chance to change. Isn’t it ironic that as bad as Bush has been, he may have actually been doing some good, by unifying the American public & government, and the goals of both.

  13. Damn Randalf, I’ve been jumping up and down about campaign finance reform for years. Where are those chicken s. dems, or republicans for that matter, when we need them? Entrenched! Getting the money out of politics should be the first priority.

    On “Liberal”: Liberal as a pejorative is the work of the spin masters. So, here from my old college dictionary is the definition of “liberal”.

    1.favorable to progress or reform, as in religious or political affairs. 2. noting or pertaining to a political party advocating measures of progressive political reform.

    I ARE ONE and by definition I could be in any party or no party.

  14. I’m left-handed, but I never considered myself too far left or right of center….. Anon’s dictionary definition sounds good on paper, but it comes down to how you view reform and/or progress…. I’m sure the Bushey’s think that’s what they are doing…. I disagree with them on many points, but I hope when the U.S of A. parts company with them that we don’t swing too far in the opposite direction…. Need to keep an even keel, which is hard to do in today’s world….. (I do use the word “but” a lot – I guess I know our government’s a mess, BUT I just don’t know how to fix it.)

  15. I, sadly, agree with you MR.

  16. Now, I’ll go back to listening to Poco (one of the most underrated bands of my era).
    Sorry, if I’m off topic.

  17. TTop: This is one of the few times that I will totally agree with you. Your comment #1 was very well put and I couldn’t agree more. I guess I am of both of the political thought police forces. I think we should try to help out fellow man and embrace new ideas and thoughts( We don’t have to like them but you have the right to put them forth) and I guess that makes me Liberal, But I think that right is right wrong is wrong and the Constitution is the supreme law of our country and all laws should based upon it, I believe we should have a very strong national defence program. I guess that makes me Conservative, The Dem’s have some good points as do the GOP but I think that it is time to get rid of ALL OF THEM and start over. And we need to embrace the formation and acknowledgement of a viable 3rd party.

Leave a Reply

To prove you're a person (not a spam script), type the security word shown in the picture. Click on the picture to hear an audio file of the word.
Anti-spam image