Is Gonzo finished?

Apparently Fox "News" tried to get someone to appear and defend Gonzales and could find no one willing to do so. Tomorrow a move to impeach Gonzales is to be introduced. It is not clear this will succeed. But if no one is willing to come forward and defend the embattled A.G. how would anyone (read Republicans) dare to block the impeachment? I should think this will put Republicans in a truly awkward position and as only Bush and Cheney support him it looks like he will have to finally go. You can rise very high on incompetence in the Bush/Cheney administration but I guess there is a limit even there. Bush/Cheney could declare martial law and have us all arrested, cancel the 2008 election, and order some ermine robes and gold and jewel encrusted staffs. Don't laugh.

Another comment on the great cleavage scandal. Some Republican (I can't remember which one - they all look alike to me) said that as Hillary's campaign is so carefully scripted she never does anything without meaning to do it, implying, of course, that she revealed her cleavage deliberately. I wish I could remember his name as I would like to ask him just what it is he believes she is doing by this daring act. I don't think she can be trying to prove she's a woman, she's been around far too long for any mistakes to be made there. Perhaps he thinks she's trying to attract the lesbian vote (Republicans have tried for years to suggest she might be a lesbian). Maybe she's just trying to call attention to her pulchritude? Perhaps she's trying to divert attention from her petty squabble with Obama. I think the best guess is she's trying to appeal to the obvious and widespread prurient interests of Republicans and thereby attract some votes. Maybe sometimes a cigar is just a cigar and a blouse is just a blouse. I don't think we should take our attention away from this monumental problem even for a minute, we might have to consider the disaster that is Iraq and the Bush/Cheney Presidency.

I see the great hypocritical loudmouth, windbag Newt Gingrich, is at it again, telling us all his views on what is what. Does he have any credibility? And if so, why? He has been exposed more than once as dishonest as well as super hypocritical, so why would anyone listen to him? He doesn't even stack up well against the multiple Republican candidates already announced, who have all lost out to "None of the above." If Newt the Pontificator does throw his hat in the ring they'll have to change that last category to "No, no, a thousand time no, I'd rather die than say yes."

Michael Vick is guilty until proven innocent. Unfortunate but apparently true, at least for many. I think the moral is, don't abuse dogs (stick to abusing children you'll get a better deal). While I certainly condemn cruelty to any animals, the killing of masses of innocent human beings is at least as bad if not worse, yet many people don't seem to mind the latter as much as the former. Strange, that.

LKBIQ:
"The priviledge of absurdity; to which no living creature is subject but man only"
Thomas Hobbes