Waxman: Rice headed for "confrontation" with panel

[Enrique]

http://thegate.nationaljournal.com/2007/10/_waxman_rice_headed_for_confro_1.php

House Oversight and Government Reform Chairman Henry Waxman yesterday sharpened his rhetoric in an ongoing clash with the State Department, indicating he will renew efforts to force Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to appear before the panel.

"Secretary Rice is going to have a confrontation with this committee," Waxman told Deputy Assistant Secretary for Near East Affairs Larry Butler, who testified at a six-hour hearing on U.S. efforts to combat corruption in Iraq, after Rice declined to appear.

At issue was State's contention that broad assessments of corruption levels in Iraq should be classified because they might damage U.S.-Iraq relations, a position Waxman called ridiculous.

More broadly, committee Democrats have recently blasted the department for limited cooperation in a series of inquiries. At a hearing Tuesday on security contractor Blackwater USA, Waxman said State was less responsive than Blackwater to document requests.

(...)

[rodeodance]

1. well, first Waxman has to get ms prizzy pants in the hot seat!

[Sagan]

2. Government 101 -- Cut.. off..their..money...

I'm not sure when Congress stopped working like it's supposed to work, but if State won't cooperate, then don't fund them. If the WH won't cooperate, don't fund THEM.

Every department is supposed to cooperate with Congress.. Ostensibly, that's how they get their money. But nowadays, you can tell Congress to fuck off and hey.. you get your funding anyway! What a great way for Congress to stay relevant.

[babylonsister]

3. So confront her already, stop pussy-footing around! nt

[TwilightGardener]

4. So...the State Dept. is essentially conceding widespread corruption, and

is afraid of the damage when the truth comes out--classified my ASS! Since when is plain 'ol corruption a national security threat, or a matter of intelligence?

edit to add--Rolling Stone magazine did a huge article on defense contractor corruption--how secret can it be?

[Masked Man]

5. Kick her behind, Mr. Waxman! n/t

[Didereaux]

6. Henry better be careful Condi BITES!

http://www.flickr.com/photos/12461951@N03/


..... ;)

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

7. So why isn't she being cited for contempt of Congress? Actions

prove louder than words.

[JDPriestly]

8. Oh No! More angry letters -- and compromises about consequences.

Waxman, Leahy, Reid, Pelosi, etc. need to do more than just threaten.

The Bushies simply turn up their noses. The Democrats in Congress are frightened and powerless. We should throw out the whole lot of them and start over with some people who will stand up for us.

The problem in the ranks of the Democrats is that the Democratic Congressmembers are not all on the same page. That is, each of them thinks he or she is elected on his or her own, individual merits. And that may be true. But at this point, we need to get our party together so that we know what we stand for. Certainly one thing we stand for is open, honest government. Can't we all agree on that? Can't we make that a priority and let our Congresscritters know that is the bottom line in values? We are tired of their lies and secret deals. We want open, honest government. No more secret memos. No more hidden deals between Bush and Congress. If Congress makes a compromise, they should announce it. The represent us. What is it about the word "represent" that they don't understand? They have a duty to be absolutely honest with us. They have no right to make deals behind our backs. Yet, we learn about these deals over and over -- and the deals are always bad for our side.

Honest, open government before all else. That is what I want.

[EST]

13. Thee and I are kindred spirits.

There is one point, though, that does figure in, however, and allows them to persist and that is that they really do, constitutionally, have the right to make secret deals and even lie, if necessary.

The problems arise, however, when a crew gets in there that thinks the exception is the rule. There are demonstrably good reasons that political hacks are immune to prosecution for the acts they perform in furtherance of their jobs, but the continued existence of democratic or representational republic forms of government depend on a leavening of honest men of good will.

That leavening is too abominably scarce in today's setup and the immature zealots, those whose development halted between three and thirteen, have invaded the place. The beaten-down democrats easily fall victim to the intimidation of these schoolyard bullies and the under developed republicans abuse anyone who doesn't share their shark-like excesses.

When people refuse to behave as acceptable public citizens, there has to be an expansion of the rules requiring of them certain levels of conduct and restraint. Those rules need teeth.

[EST]

9. Y'know, in the unlikely event that I might be summoned to appear

before congress, or a grand jury, and I declined...there would be a flock of deputies at my door, decorated with badges and big-ass guns and rating zero or negative on the sensitivity or sense-of-humor scale, who would make sure I tended to priorities.

These damn bastards self important seat warmers always think they should be privileged to carve out an exception for themselves, no matter the circumstances, and that the laws only apply to them when they imagine themselves victimized.
Gone are the days when the more pragmatic among us automatically assume that the privileged crew is, somehow, smarter, better informed or immanently more qualified than the rest of us and delicate concepts like equal justice and rule of law have little impact.

I, for one, am highly pissed when I see ill qualified and irretrievably biased assholes presume themselves to be minor gods who aren't subject to the same rules as are we mere mortals.

[radfringe]

10. is the powder finally dry enough? eom

[Enrique]

11. I support Waxman n/t

[radfringe]

12. i do too, but I want to know when this is going to go beyond

tapping our feet as we wait for the powder to be dry enough to use it...

[EST]

14. Throwing off a dozen years of treatment as underclass

citizens must be pretty rough on them.
I hope that the probable democratic control of government that could arise from next year's elections doesn't drive them to giddy excess.
We are going to have to expand our demands on them and really crack down on the less than scrupulous actors that we might have more of a tendency to wink at in leaner times.

The people in government need to be held to an even higher standard than normal humans. The bullshit of excusing themselves by claiming the cloak of "normal human, subject to mistakes" can no longer apply.

[L. Coyote]

15. K & R5

[lovuian]

16. Condi is going to feel what Gonzales felt ...Pressure

Ya Waxman realizes that Condi is going to have to come in

Go Waxman

[Parche]

17. Classified Means To Hide Them From Public

That is all.........:hi:

[Gregorian]

18. It's going to take handcuffs, Henry! Get a pair.

Jeez. Harriet Meyer. Condi. They need handcuffs now.

It's so blatantly obvious that these people are not only NOT our servants, but they are our overlords. They would have issued a bench warrant.

Why aren't they issuing bench warrants? (As if I know what I'm talking about. NOT.)

[spiderpig]

19. Why are we paying this person's salary?

What the hell does she DO, anyway?

[hvn_nbr_2]

20. "Confrontation"

My prediction on this confrontation:

Congress: Hey, we're serious this time.

Condi: (Silence)

Congress: We really mean it now. We're gonna hold our breath till we turn blue.

Condi: (Silence)

Congress: Oh, okay. Here's $100 billion. Do whatever you want with it.