this sentence pretty much says it all about our democratic congress

[spanone]

from nytimes article on mukasey confirmation hearing:

<snip>Although Mr. Mukasey disappointed Democrats by not answering many questions about those polices, senators from both parties suggested at the end of a day of testimony that he was all but certain to be confirmed.

those policies in question? alberto gonzales' policies.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/18/washington/18mukasey.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

[cali]

1. No it doesn't. It says that they're making the least onerous of two

choices, and recognizing that it's not a good idea to leave Keisler in power. If you have any suggestions what they could do, feel free to elaborate, but remember that bush could just take his time nominating another person, or not do so at all.

Peter Keisler, ace criminal and BFEE toady. Don't know much about him? Here:

8 things you need to know about Peter Keisler:


Keisler was a co-founder of the Federalist Society;

The Federalist Society was a check box in Goodling's evaluation of U. S. Attorneys;

Keisler oversaw the Administration's fight against habeas corpus for Guantanamo;

Keisler allegedly interfered with the Tobacco conspiracy trial;

Keisler received a recess appointment at age 24;

Keisler testified against extending whistle blower protections using arguments contradicting existing federal statutes;

Keisler defended secrecy for all Warrantless Surveillance info, arguing that even confirmation or denial of its existence threatens national security;

Keisler defended the Interior Department in Cobell v. Norton - a tour de force of legal maneuvering and alleged DOJ obstruction of justice.

http://scoop.epluribusmedia.org/story/2007/9/19/204313/...

I'm very leery of Mukasey but at least he is NOT a bushco insider and has shown some independence from the admin in the Padilla case when he ruled for Padilla. I was alarmed by many of his answers today and I thought the Senate Dems were all disappointing in their perfunctory questioning, BUT; I want Keisler out, and the sooner the better.

Letting him stay in as Acting AG, simply gives Keisler more time to add to damage he's undoubtedly done in the last month. It's not too hard to figure that he's been keeping the shredders

[spanone]

2. so we're in the lesser of two evil camps?

this is not how i want my government to work.

[lateo]

3. Indeed.

How do we know that this guy won't be more evil than the person he is replacing?

[cali]

4. yes. And that's not how I want my government to work either but

but that's what's happening with bushco in the WH. Now, if you were a dem senator on Judiciary, what would you do?