If Mukasey is viewed as a decent man, the bar has been set so low that it means only that he could be fairly good but not excellent.

The fact is, Mukasey has been vetted, interrogated, coached, and hand-picked by the Cheny/Bush WH. He is intended to be their protection against investigation and possible prosecution for war crimes and other impeachable offenses.

Decent? I think not!

To parapharase the late, great Bette Davis in ALL ABOUT EVE, "HOLD ON TO YOUR SEATBELTS, IT'S GOING TO BE A BUMPY RIDE!" This phrase, of course, is best said with a martini glass in one hand and a cigarette in the other, but in the interests of good health and anti-cancer, I will substitute a glass of absinthe and a hashish-filled brownie! OF COURSE Mukasey GOT NUDGED by Bushland Uber Allies to TOE THE LINE or BE WITHDRAWN as the nominee. It's LISTEN to FEARLESS LEADER time, and Mukasey is SADLY lacking in the REQUISITE INTESTINAL FORTITUDE, i.e., GUTS, to GO AGIN' Monkey Boy CHIMPya and the pack of sewer rats at Bushland Uber Allies!!!!!

I like how you're willing to give Mukasey the benefit the the doubt, Dorian. That is a nice trait. However, he doesn't deserve it.

Mukasey may talk real nice and show off his book smarts, but by waffling on topics like torture, illegal eavesdropping, executive power, etc., he has shown that he is without honor and definitely not the man for the job. The reason is this: those issues on which he waffled are the most crucial issues facing an AG. We are currently facing the most dire threat to the republic since WW2, as a domestic power is working to drastically change the form of government in the US, in complete defiance of the Constitution. The job of the AG is to prevent this (IOW, defend the Constitution, per his oath). Mukasey, when asked, would surely say "Sure, I'll defend the Constitution." But by waffling on these important subjects, he's talking out the other side of his mouth.

Based on your 3 options for who Mukasey is, I would have to go with #3: aiding and abetting a lawless administration by faking his way through the confirmation hearings, just like the rest of Bush's appointees. He deserves to be tarred and feathered for this, not respected.

The change isn't sitting well with Democrats. Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Patrick Leahy said the "bright line" Mukasey laid down Wednesday seemed to be fading away Thursday, and he wondered whether Mukasey had received some kind of course correction from the White House between the two sessions. Mukasey said he hadn't.

Let's recap.

We've had a series of Bush appointees who, in their confirmation hearings say one thing, and once they're in power, do almost exactly the opposite. That is the well-established precedent. The job of Congress (or, the subset of Congress who values the rule of law) is to make sure this Bush appointee doesn't follow the pattern of all the others.

So we've got Mukasey saying, well, maybe the president can in fact torture, and maybe he is actually above the law. Well, hello? Congress? This is your queue to say "Sorry, we need an appointee who is neither a criminal nor a crime enabler. You got any of those?"

However, what did they do? They just asked Mukasey, are you pulling our leg? Are you taking orders from the White House that compromises your ability to be honest with us? And Mukasey said no. Case closed.

downwarddog:

A valid point and well-taken. I struggled with this myself, but wanted to give Mukasey the benefit of the doubt. He had, as I see it, three choices. One is, as you mention, "walk away." The second one, to agree to serve with the intention of really cleaning up the department and putting "Justice" back in the Justice Department. He gave some indications of this until the hearings got into matters such as torture, illegal eavesdropping, executive power, etc. Then, he started quibbling and parsing. Finally, he could have decided to aid and abet the illegal activities of his president, and just "fake" it during the hearings. In the end, I think he is having second thoughts about the wisdom and the ethics of working for this president. So, let me modify my assessment to: " he seems, or seemed to be a decent man...until further and/or future assessments"

Thanks for calling me on it.

Dorian, you lament the terrible position Mukasey has been put in "where he has to respond in such a cautious, tortured (no pun intended), parsing manner to so many of the questions touching on the disgusting practices--in particular torture--of a corrupt administration. An administration that he knows, if confirmed, he may very well be called upon to protect, defend and cover up for."

Excuse me, but wouldn't a"decent man" refuse to take part in such a scheme? Wouldn't a decent man walk away?

If I have learned anything from Bush it is that the dismantling of a democracy requires such capitulations of so-called "decent men."

Watching the confirmation hearings of Judge Mukasey has made me feel very ashamed and very angry. Not because of the character of the Judge (he seems to be a decent man), and not because of what he says (he appears to be very knowledgeable), but because of how he feels that he has to say it. It just infuriates me that a decent man has been put in a predicament where he has to respond in such a cautious, tortured (no pun intended), parsing manner to so many of the questions touching on the disgusting practices--in particular torture--of a corrupt administration. An administration that he knows, if confirmed, he may very well be called upon to protect, defend and cover up for.

Mukasey has made it clear that he believes in the notion of the unitary executive, the very foundation of Bush's malfeasance. There is nothing Constitutional about a United States President being above the law, other than the usefulness in dropping the Constitution's good name into this intellectually dishonest argument.

The Congress, if it had a backbone, would fight vigorously to defend the checks and balances system of which it is theoretically an equal part. But of course, they will merely whine and complain, then ultimately and predictably cast a vote not only for Mukasey, but for their own irrelevance.