No Letter, No Shows, No Surprise

[kpete]

No Letter

The White House has refused to comply with a Republican senator's request for information about Alberto Gonzales's conflicting testimony on a secret surveillance program by a 12 p.m. Tuesday deadline.

http://rawstory.com/news/2007/White_House_hasnt_responded_to_request_0731.html



NO SHOWS

Rumsfeld no-show at Pat Tillman hearing:

Former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld appears to have refused to testify at a hearing scheduled for Wednesday on the friendly fire death of Army Specialist Patrick Tillman, RAW STORY has learned.

http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Rumsfeld_apparently_refuses_to_testify_at_0731.html


Cheney snubs House investigation of environmental meddling Nick Juliano
Published: Tuesday July 31, 2007

Cheney doesn't reply to environmental invite

Members of the Bush administration will be called upon Tuesday to explain decisions on environmental policy that were apparently guided by politics -- not science -- during a House Natural Resources Committee hearing.

The hearing won't include the official environmentalists believe to be most responsible for the political meddling -- Vice President Dick Cheney. The vice president was invited to testify at the hearing in the wake of revelations that he reached far down into the federal environmental bureaucracy to influence decision-making, but he did not respond to the invitation.

"We don't expect him to show up to testify," Resources Committee spokeswoman Heather Warren told RAW STORY

http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Cheney_snubs_House_investigation_of_environmental_0731.html

[The Stranger]

1. Cheney, Gonzo, Miers -- refusing to appear. Do you think they'll willingly give up power in 2009?

Come on now.

[spotbird]

9. No, but for some reason the fools in

Congress must.

[LanternWaste]

21. I do. And I'll gladly take mayo with my crow...

I do. And I'll gladly take mayo with my crow if indeed I am wrong and the sky actually does fall this time. But I'll bet the five spot in my wallet there will be a smooth transition of power, no one will be forced into internment camps for voting the wrong way, and life will continue.

Don't get me wrong-- your scenario would make a great movie (a perfect vehicle for another sub-par Michael Bay disaster-film), but those guys simply do not have the support to realize anything else other than going quietly into that good night.

[bdamomma]

2. nothing like them saying FU to Congress huh?

Congress is being played for fools.

[dkofos]

6. Why not? It seems to work for them!!

[ThomWV]

3. Is the White House trying to commit political suicide?

[bbgrunt]

15. they think this is their "bring 'em on' showdown at the constitutional corrale

and Gary Cooper is dead.

[rodeodance]

4. arrogance,

[porphyrian]

5. Can we fucking impeach yet? - n/t

[dkofos]

7. NO

[porphyrian]

11. What part of the Constitution do you disagree with? - n/t

[dkofos]

12. Talk to nancy. I wanted him impeached 1/21/2001

[porphyrian]

14. Heh, heh. - n/t

[Nickster]

8. Ahh, the smell of Hubris!

[JDPriestly]

10. Constitutional crisis-- which began in 2000 when the Supreme Court

exceeded its authority to anoint King Bush. Shame on you Sandra Day O'Connor. Surely you knew better.

[saracat]

13. Where is the outrage?News Corp obviously won't put this frontpage!

[John Q. Citizen]

16. Damn that Nadar and that Gravel and that Cindy! It's all their fault!

That outrage?

[saracat]

17. Nope.And if not for Nader we wouldn't need the outrage!

And Gravel is a nonentity.Too bad.he used to be great as did Cindy who is now a cypher! Odd isn't it, they get more attention than issues! And accomplish little except attempting to denigrate those that are actually constructively working toward peace. Whatever..

[here_is_to_hope]

18. Never miss a chance to bash her, do ya?

Seems all that hate is gonna eat ya up.
:crazy:

[saracat]

19. Why should I just take the snark others dish out? I am supposed to ignore them?

They can slam me but I am supposed to be quiet? Not.I didn't mention any of those people. The John Q Citizen poster did.

[John Q. Citizen]

22. I didn't slam you, I asked if that was the outrage you were posting about.

I asked because I've noticed an awful lot of outrage around those three rather powerless individuals.

I did bring up their names, true.

I think they are good outlets for peoples outrage. It keeps them focused on the inconsequential.

Better to focus on them than on election fraud, for instance, or on pre-emptive war.

I think the Dems in the house should pass a resolution condemning the bush doctrine of pre-emptive war, but I'm afraid the Dems might not have the votes to do it. What do you think?

[saracat]

24. Nope.Don't have the votes .But Nader wasn't powerless enough in 2000

I actualluy worked to check signatures in my stae to get him thrown off the ballot.You would be amazed how many Repug precinct commotte people signed his petitions.Her was a calculated effort by the GOP. He also did the same in 2004.I checked those signatures too.no one with GOP money and influence is powerless.

[here_is_to_hope]

23. I dont recall anyone slamming you-not even I

who finds you a little more than manic when it comes to Sheehan, I mean what did you have last week? Quite a few posts denigrating her.
Whatever but you need to check yourself some. It doesnt look good on you.

[saracat]

25. Might say the same to those that worship her!

[here_is_to_hope]

26. Sure thing, as soon as I see one person posting a number of threads

claiming her as the second coming (the opposite of what you are doing).

I aint gonna make you see a thing, you are in your mindset, I am only giving you a mirror.

[saracat]

27. Thanks .I have one.I'll pass it on to those on the other side who need it! LOL!

[endarkenment]

20. Solution: go on vacation!

Oh that constitutional crisis? That was so last summer. We are so fucked. Where is our pom-pom squad to splain it all to us crazy-ass far lefty dummies?