Sanctioning the worst

Bush once again has resorted to appointing someone to a position when Congress has already turned the person down. In this case he has appointed this guy, Fox, as ambassador to Belgium. Democrats are outraged, and rightly so. This is like Bush sticking his finger in their eye. First, these recess appointments were not meant simply to allow Presidents to circumvent Congress. They were meant to allow Presidents to appoint someone for an interim when Congress was out of session for a long time (not merely a week). There is some question as to the legality of this particular case (but nothing will come of it). Fox is controversial because he is known to have donated $50,000 to the Swift Boaters, the sleazy bunch of outrageous liars that tried to roviate Kerry when he was running for President. When Fox came up for this appointment Kerry, among others, was involved in turning him down (and why not). The outrage over this appointment seems to be mostly because Bush is once again trying to demonstrate his power and basically insulting the Democrats. But I think there is a more serious implication involved. It is widely believed that the Republicans, following Rove, have been willing to do anything, no matter how illegal, immoral, unethical, or whatever to further their political agenda (trying to create a permanent Republican takeover of the U.S.). As Fox and the Swift Boaters are a classic example of totally immoral politics Bush, by making this appointment, is sanctioning this kind of political immorality. He is saying that this type of Rovian politics is fine with him. Personally, I find this disgusting beyond belief.
Will Karl Rove ever get his comeuppance? If ever there was an evil presence in American politics it has to be this slimy turdblossom.

We are heading for a most interesting confrontation. Ms. Goodling has not only said she will take the 5th if called upon to testify before Congress (a totally unprecedented act) she is now apparently refusing to talk to Congress at all. As a high level member of the Justice Department she really cannot get away with this in spite of what her lawyer seems to think. So what will happen? Will she be found in contempt of Congress? Arrested? Jailed? Or will she eventually be forced to give in and testify? The burning question here is, of course, what is she hiding? What does she have to fear by testifying whether under oath or not? In the meanwhile she is making it more and more likely that Rove and Meirs will be forced to testify under oath. Oh, it's all so exciting I can barely wait.

Locally we have an interesting situation with respect to our schools. Whereas most people, at least most Democrats, support Public Education in general, there is an increasing number that are unwilling to support our local schools. The basic problem, of course, is that our Republican legislators, who have been in complete control of education here in Idaho, have consistently refused to adequately fund our schools. Thus local communities are forced, year after year, to ask the local citizens to pass levies to make up for the annual shortfalls. As our local Schoolboard, and our local Administrators, have managed to alienate many of our citizens, and have engaged in a variety of questionable activities, many who routinely vote for the levees are now balking at this uncritical support. It is a very complicated and awkward situation. Stay tuned.