Going, going, Gonzo-Meter

On several occasions, Slate has toyed with a fun little feature called the (fill in the blank)-o-meter. There was the Saddameter (tracking the likelihood of an Iraqi invasion), the Clintometer (gauging the likelihood of the Lewinsky scandal forcing Clinton from office), and the Miers-o-Meter (measuring the likelihood of Harriet Miers’ confirmation to the Supreme Court).

Back on March 20, Slate created the Gonzo-Meter, to measure the likelihood of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales being forced to leave the Bush administration. It obviously wasn’t scientific; it was the opinion of Slate’s Emily Bazelon, John Dickerson, and Dahlia Lithwick. But it was also a rather entertaining way of gauging the daily Gonzales-related headlines — when there was really bad news for the AG, the Gonzo-Meter would inch closer and closer to 100% (at which point Gonzales would be toast).

This week, Slate shut down the Gonzo-Meter. Bazelon, Dickerson, and Lithwick came to a frustrating realization: it doesn’t matter what Gonzales does or how serious the evidence against him is.

When we first launched this enterprise, we truly believed that the sun rose in the east and gravity worked. We were wrong. As we have increasingly observed, most notably on the days the AG testified before Congress, some mystical alchemy provides that the worse he does, the better his chances become of remaining in office. At this point, just about nothing Gonzales does could cause the president to fire him…. So we drop the Gonzo-Meter to zero, in the perverse hope that Bush might start to believe that ditching his AG is his own idea, not ours. […]

We’ve no doubt the scandal will only blossom and grow, and we’ll keep watching it and reporting on it. But the laws of physics demand that we admit defeat. If we didn’t, we would ourselves become little Alberto Gonzaleses — denying the bracing truth of the world in which we live. Instead, the three of us will promptly begin drinking at our desks, hitting on our summer interns, and setting grease fires in the office kitchen. The Gonzo-Meter was a bust, but we want to really test that we’ve got job security like he’s got.

The timing was of particular significance. Slate understandably scrapped the project, but did so immediately after one-fifth of the Senate GOP caucus said it had no confidence in the AG, new revelations about the politicization of immigration judges, and another damaging document dump. A day later, we learned the Justice Department’s internal investigation of Gonzales was expanding to include new revelations.

Normally, that would make the Gonzo-Meter go up. But when it comes to Bush, norms are irrelevant.

I really liked the way Slate put this: “[W]e truly believed that the sun rose in the east and gravity worked.” It gets back to a point I raised a month ago about the way DC used to operate.

By late April, Gonzales’ resignation was a foregone conclusion. A Republican with close ties to the White House said Bush and Gonzales were “the only two people on the planet Earth who don’t see” the need for the AG to step down. The Senate hearing in which Gonzales was supposed to save his skin turned out to be a disaster.

But the Bush gang rejects political norms. Our political system is supposed to follow certain unwritten political “rules.” When a cabinet secretary screws up, creates a scandal, becomes a distraction, loses the nation’s confidence, and possibly engages in criminal behavior, he or she is supposed to resign. If a resignation isn’t offered, a president is supposed to ask for it.

But this president doesn’t concern himself with these “rules.” Donald Rumsfeld, Alphonso Jackson, and Rod Paige proved that the president is more than willing to tolerate cabinet secretaries staying on far too long.

Gonzales has become the most reviled man in the administration, after having been caught lying and losing control of the Justice Department. The rules say Gonzales has to go. Bush, meanwhile, is The Decider — and The Decider doesn’t much care about the rules.

A month ago, the New York Daily News quoted a “senior Republican” saying, “[Bush] wants to fight, but that will change because it has to.”

But it doesn’t “have to.” It only “has to” if the president wants to be a responsible leader in a political system in which conduct has meaning.

Slate concluded, “It is just about universally agreed upon that Gonzales will go down in history as the attorney general who helped the president: 1) torture, 2) wreak havoc on civil liberties, 3) fire U.S. attorneys who didn’t prosecute along preferred political lines, 4) demoralize the Department of Justice, 5) worsen Bush’s already dismal relationship with Congress, and 6) relentlessly hector a man in the intensive care unit.”

Just the way the president likes it.

I’ve noted before that the real reason for impeaching folks such as Gonzo, Cheney and even Bush is that none are subject to reelection, all have horribly low approval ratings, and because of that they will feel they can do whatever the hell they want, public, country, world be damned. It is a very dangerous situation, in this case made particularly more dangerous by the ‘messianic’ personal view of Bush (and possibly the other two, and definitely a whole lot of hose flying monkeys working for them). It is truly a shame, and quite telling, that moderate republicans cannot bring themselves to act upon this and join with the Dems to remove these very dangerous people (in Cheney’s case, dangerous demon).

  • Rule number 1 of crime Lords:
    You don’t fire your Tom Hagen even if your Tom Hagen is a half wit jackass.

  • Indeed, this particular instance of Administration malfeasance grates me each and every day. We as citizens of this nation are not being served by this Attorney General, yet it really does appear (heck with ‘appearances;’ at this point, it a truism) that no matter what this guy does, and no matter how much noise is made across the political spectrum, he will not resign or be forced out of office.

    What makes this so grating is that there doesn’t seem to be a damn thing that anyone can do about it. There should be some remedy that requires the removal of a public servant in the face of such demonstrable evidence of wrongdoing, but apparently there is not (would he be forced out even if impeached? Would Bush go along with it, or proclaim ‘executive privelege/pleasure of the president’ excuse? The fact that this guy is still on the governmental payroll–that my taxes are paying his salary–is abominable. Yet what can we do in the face of this stubborn, stubborn man in the White House?

  • Thank you. I’m just so sick and tired of people who still expect Bush to operate by the usual political norms.

    And the worst of it is, he may now be changing those norms permanently for future presidents.

  • It seems to me that the very first rule tossed overboard was the one that said, When you’re caught, you’re caught. Common sense and common decency demand this.
    Over the years, I’ve seen both sides claim ‘Yeah, but they all do it”. Under normal rules, this was an acceptable defense against suspicion. But once wrongdoing was proven, When you’re caught, you’re caught kicked in. Not so with this regime. Gonzo has lied on numerous occasions. He’s been caught over again. Under any measure of common sense and common decency he would have been removed long ago. Then again, common sense and common decency might be the traits most lacking in this regime.

  • I think we need new adjectives in the English language for incometence, greed, stupidity, cronyism etc. because there are no words currently in existance to describe the depths to which this administration has sunk.

    IMO, Bush has decided that he and his legacy are toast. He figures that since he has been destroyed by all of those nasty liberal traitors, he is going to bring the US, and if possible the rest of the world down him. That’ll learn us

  • I guess all we can hope for is that God will punish them in the afterlife. The afterlife was invented as a source of reassurance for those who have no power. As long as Republicans stay loyal to their party and not the nation, the rest of us have no power.

  • Bush has absolutely nothing to gain by firing Gonzales.

    It wouldn’t make the problem go away … it would only bring the legal firestorm that is brewing in DoJ closer to the White House.

    What has occured in the DoJ under Bush is an affront to the people of America. Why would the man that brought it about (Bush) fire his “main man” at DoJ? I’m not holding my breath.

  • Clearly something must be done. The DOJ will have to be cleaned up once AG AG  is gone. Should the Democrats wait until after they recapture the White House in 2008, as they most likely will, then rooting out the Messiah Brigade in the DOJ will be portrayed by the GOP as a political purge-we all know they have no shame. Hence AG AG must be pushed out ASAP so that his Republican replacement does the the needed janitorial work, but how? The Democrats are haunted by the I-word-impotent. The House might be able to impeach, but the Senate is unlikely to convict. If that were to happen BushCo would trumpet it as a vindication of AG AG, which would make thing even worse. So Democrats shouldn’t rush into impeachment, but that doesn’t mean that it can be done, if it is done smartly. A two pronged approach might work. The first prong is already underway, the investigation of the DOJ and White House. The second prong is for the Democrats to begin to make their case in the court of public opinion. Fan out and talk about the danger of the politicization of DOJ and how it undermines our very democracy. Use the information from the investigations to build the case for impeachment with the public. Mobilize the public to demand that AG AG be held accountable. There is only so much we can expect of our elected representatives. If something is to be done it is up to us, the people, to demand that it be done.

  • Gonzo is doing a great job – keeping the focus off Rove.
    J. Flowers has it pegged above, Republicans are loyal to party over the country.

  • The viability of someone in government only matters if you want to get something done. If you have no intention of being effective, then it doesn’t matter if no one will take a meeting with you.

  • I suspect that one of the main reasons that Bush hesitates to ditch Gonzales is that any replacement attorney general would have to meet the consent requirement of the Democratically controlled congress. That might lead to an AG that actually believes in running his department in an honorable and independent fashion. That, in turn, could lead to more aggressive investigations of the executive branch.

  • “rege” states the facts and circumstances well.

    Yet I kinda like Gonzales staying right where he is, keweping the issues alive and front and center, and continuing to damage Bushit and the Republicans.

    And underscoring the fact that Bushit’s “legacy” now includes overt domestic disaster to add to his foreign policy disasters.

    The central worry, though, is that Bushit will bring all of us down with him. He is a vengeful, vindictive little prick, as the honest know.

  • Comments are closed.