docwebster ([personal profile] docwebster) wrote2006-10-27 09:37 am

Every time I think he can't sink any lower, Dubya proves me wrong.

(Cut and pasted from the very aptly named as it's about the scum who have corrupted the name of Republican Crooks and Liars, we get this charming bon mot.)

"In yet another egregious executive-power grab, President Bush asserted his right last week via signing statement to ignore a Congressional mandate that the next FEMA Director have at least five years of disaster response experience. You would think after the Brownie debacle during Katrina last year the President would be eager to appoint someone with qualifications exceeding Arabian horse show judge to lead the nations emergency response efforts. Sadly, no. Because, after all, his unchallenged powers as Decider-In-Chief are far more important than competence and keeping Americans safe."

I have had nothing but contempt for this sorry excuse for a human being for a long time now, and this just.. I have no words.

[identity profile] moropus.livejournal.com 2006-10-27 03:36 pm (UTC)(link)
Head. Desk.

[identity profile] not-secure.livejournal.com 2006-10-27 04:39 pm (UTC)(link)
If they've been involved with the Bush administration since the first election, they DO have 5+ years of disaster response experience. The press conferences alone...

8^)

[identity profile] idiomagic.livejournal.com 2006-10-27 05:50 pm (UTC)(link)
I still think they should put ME in charge of FEMA, but, sadly, I have never judged an Arabian horse show, so it's out of the question...

[identity profile] nsingman.livejournal.com 2006-10-27 06:15 pm (UTC)(link)
I have little regard for those "signing statements," or our chief executive, but from where exactly in the Constitution does the Congress derive the power for that mandate?

[identity profile] foxsynergy.livejournal.com 2006-10-27 09:30 pm (UTC)(link)
Is the only requirement still that FEMA workers be "fashion gods"?

For every complex problem there's a simple and obvious solution ... that's wrong.

[identity profile] rain-manpnw.livejournal.com 2006-10-28 05:37 pm (UTC)(link)
Doc -

I gotta disagree with you on this one. The power-grab is in the other direction, with Congress trying to interfere with an Executive Branch office. It's a way for Congresscritters to tell their constituents thay're _doing_something_, without really doing anything.

I don't know if FEMA directors are subject to Congressional approval; if they are, that's the place for Congress to impose restrictions.
n
Not this way.

Yeah, I know - Shrub is an idiot, his choices are political cronies, yada yada yada. But that's not a (valid) reason for Congress to do this. Step back for a moment, try to forget that it's Shrub in the Oval Office, and look at it reasonably. I think you'll agree with me that's it's overreaction on the part of Congress.