Posted on 02/02/2005 6:33:50 AM PST by OXENinFLA
PROGRAM -- (Senate - February 01, 2005)
Mr. BROWNBACK. Mr. President, tomorrow the Senate will resume consideration of the nomination of Alberto Gonzales to be Attorney General. A number of colleagues spoke on this nomination today, and we expect a full day of debate tomorrow as well. Under the agreement, we will alternate debate in 1-hour blocks throughout the day. Again, I encourage those Members who wish to speak on the Gonzales nomination to contact the chairman and ranking member of the Judiciary Committee as soon as possible.
ORDERS FOR WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 2, 2005 -- (Senate - February 01, 2005) Mr. BROWNBACK. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 9:15 a.m. on Wednesday, February 2. I further ask that following the prayer and pledge, the morning hour be deemed expired, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the time for the two leaders be reserved, and at 9:30 a.m. the Senate proceed to executive session and resume consideration of the nomination of Alberto Gonzales to be Attorney General, as provided under the previous order; provided that at 2:30 p.m. Senator Byrd be recognized for up to 1 hour.
HA! Well, why don't we get the names of those two Boston Globe reporters and do an expose on THEM? I bet you there is a lot of dirt on them!
An Attorny General must enforce the law and abide by the Constitution. Take your beef up w/Congress, which makes the law and the Supreme Court, which rules on its constitutionality.
Oh, good, now he is done! FINALLY!
YES! Even the roll call is more interesting. HA
I'm raising valid points about his credentials.
You haven't engaged in questioning his integrity beyond a bunch of chutzpah. I'm not here to tell you whether his positions are valid ones or not, nor tell you where you can find out more details on said positions. That's for you to do. I asked a simple question, and you didn't answer it.
Grade for you: F.
Is it un-PC to suggest that ZULU is Mau-Mau-ing himself?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1334219/posts
I'm going to google them both!
You make a good argument. But did you approve of Whitman as Environmental Commissioner, Tom Kean as head of the 9-1-1 Commission, Colin Powell as head of the State Department or Norman Minetta as head of Transportation?
I can't watch these hearing where I am now. Maybe later. Maybe I will cahnge my mind.
But so far NOBODY has pointed me to any sources which refuted those comments. I'm a big boy and I can admit that that the statements I made were incorrect. If Gonzales gets appointed I hope I am wrong. But just show me something somewhere that indicates Gonzales is a conservative politically and doesn't hold those views which I find unacceptable.
From the above linked article:
"David Brock, the former investigative journalist who made his name revealing aspects of former President Bill Clinton's extramarital affairs, said he was watching last week's press conference on television and the "soup lines" question sparked his interest because it "struck me as so extremely biased." Brock asked his media watchdog group, Media Matters for America, to look into Talon News."
I agree; 90 percent of them don't; but that last 10 percent, who seem to post exclusively at FR and try to turn every single thread into a discussion of immigration, ARE bigots.
I liked Ashcroft. I like Rice. I have no particular problem with with most of his other appointments. I think Chertoff is a good choice.
I thought Ridge was not the best choice for Homeland Security. I think Cheney was an excellent Vice-Presidential Choice. I think Rumsfeld is good.
Just because I don't go goose-steppoing along with everything Bush says doesn't mean I don't like Bush.
I have been born and bred in Texas and live among black, brown and white and all kinds of people on a close up and personal basis. I know bigots when I see them.
I will not call any specific names, because I don't want to carry it to that personal point over the internet. But I have seen bigotry here, papered over thinly by screaming-bloody-murder-concern over illegal immigration, all of which is laid at the feet of George W Bush as he is called every crude, crass, disrectful name in the book.
And I totally disagree that he has ignored the problem. He knows it's a powder keg, like Social Security, so he has treaded lightly and tried not to needlessly alarm and anger either side - the open-borders or its polar opposite that has taken over Free Republic. He has put forward some ideas for solving the problem as he sees he problem. Which many do not like, who think we can summarily deport millions of Mexicans who live and work here, and who love to throw hateful, rhetorical bombs into every discussion.
He has said he is open to congressional ideas as well, so his are not written in stone.
Did you ever think you're live to see the day David Brock called somebody else a fake?
I would like to point out that many of the Dems that are defending the terrorists are also many of the same Dems that voted against funding our military
Agree with every word you said.
i don't find the topic that Michelle Malkin has written about and discussed : illegal immigration, to be "overrated" at all.
We all better be more concerned about an issue our government isn't giving much more serious attention to.
Plus the fact the open border has been going way before his administration and it is going to take time to fix it. Nothing happens over night.
disrectful=disrespectful
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.