Therefore, here’s the revised link to the picture version of the Bush/Cheney/Rove Cerberus:

Cerberus

BTW, mythologically-speaking, Cerberus wasn’t always limited to three heads. In earlier times he had many more, so there’s room for Rumsfeld, Libby, Gonzales, Doolittle, Peters, Brown, Snow, Abramoff, Safavian, Griles, Ashcroft, et al. Wow, that’s some junkyard dog!

“I’m sorry, but… where’s the controversy here? Granted, I stopped really paying attention when the author proved an inability to differentiate between “Bush/Cheney/Rove”.”

There’s a good reason for that inability to differentiate among the three. They’re all connected.

Here’s the applicable reference:

Cerberus

If pictures are better for you then there’s this:

Cerberus

Anyone who has been following the highjinks of the Bush II “administration” since 2001 should recognize the principals immediately.

Compared to the scandals and corruption of the current gang of thugs, the Nixon boys looks like rank amateurs.

The latest was yesterday when the Congress, with its Democrat majorities who were elected to put a stop to this abortion of justice and defilement of the Constitution, knuckled under and gave King George even more authority for illegal wiretaps and spying on American citizens.

Come on, January 20, 2009!

But it’s still going to take a long time after that to repair the damage done to science, education, and the country in general after we kick the bums out.

I guess you’d be upset that the janitors at NASA didn’t have BSME’s in Sanitation.

I think your comments are exactly right. I have read “The Prince,” and am absolutely certain Bush had Dick Cheney read it out loud to him.

When one gets into the pen with the pigs, one may expect to emerge with a coating of mud.

Re JoeCamel

Mr. JoeCamel is about as humorous as AIDS.

“If GWB can do THIS much damage by being essentially a part-time President, imagine how bad things would be if he were actually on the job!”

OK, Clinton replaced the 93 as a matter of course. I’d be curious to find out about the other 30 some replacements: how many resigned vs. died vs. fired? If any where fired, why? Any suggested reading?

Oh, and SLC, I make a comment you disagree with, so I’m a thug? I guess that makes you either clairvoyant or a prejudicial bigot.

Unfortunately, the country is too stupid to understand this, which is why the relected President Bush.

To the many people decrying Democrats: for Pete’s sake, read what I wrote. I don’t care about what the Democrats are doing, because this isn’t about Democrats. Stop trying to change the subject. The Bush White House is behind this, and so that’s who I’m calling out. If and when the Dems do stuff like this, I’ll talk about.

DennyMo, you are regurgitating long discredited neocon talking points. What Clinton did was part of a normal process, just as when Bush did it when he originally took office. The firing of the 8 US Attorneys by the White House is a very, very different issue. Read that link.

1. As usual with the Rethuglicans, Mr. Denny Mo tells a half truth. What Mr. DennyMo forgot to mention is that Mr. Clinton fired the prosecutors at the start of his first term, as does every new president who takes over from a president of the opposing party. Mr. Bush fired the prosecutors at the start of his second term. Better luck next time Mr. DennyMo.

2. As usual with the Rethuglicans, Mr. DennyMo excuses the Rethuglican war on science by stating that the Democrats do the same thing. There is no doubt that both parties are guilty of putting politics above science. However, comparing Democratic transgressions with Rethuglican transgressions is like comparing the guy who steals a little silverware from a restaurant with the guy who sticks up a bank.

And if you’re one who believes that Democrats aren’t guilty of stifling science to promote their agendas, please take off your blinders. Some of their actions on environmental policies have been at the opposite extreme of the spectrum, trampling on personal property rights and creating unfunded mandates that are *at best* based on very thin scientific evidence.

GAry 7

I don’t see any hard evidence that this appointment doesn’t make sense.

Judicial Watch? Judicial Watch is about as reliable as the Discovery Institute. I can remember their former head, Larry Klayman commenting on a cancer victim who used medical marijuana to alleviate the complications from chemotheropy. Mr. Klayman suggested prayer as an alternative.

Just when you think that His Holiness The Glorified Houseplant Who Would Be Caesar might fade quietly into the sunset without causing too much more damage (because let’s face it, there isn’t much left for him to wreck in this world), he surprises ya’ yet again.

He’s good like that.

Kisses

This after we were resoundingly called “traitors” and “cowards” by many of the same people. Nice.