Why won't they Resign?

While I always thought it was a bit harsh, I thought resigning when things go south was the risk you faced for public service at the highest levels. When something goes south in a major way, a resignation lets the organization start to heal/recover/repair/move on with less daily 24-hour psuedo-news noise, doesn’t it?

-Wolfowitz
-Gonzalez
-Rumsfeld (though he ultimately gave in)

It seems to me that most of the people who resign from this administration are the ones trying to get out before this shit hits the fan. None are willing to resign after the shit hits the fan and their department is caught holding the bag/is significantly responsible. (I’m not sure on Tenet and Powell, my memory fades).

That guy who was going to get caught in the Miss Jillian prostitution scandal, resigns even before that story is breaking and a weak later, he isn’t in the news.

Is it something in this administration, i.e., Bush? Or that a lot of these guys are Nixon veterans? Or something else?

I’m starting to think if you’re the kind of guy who won’t resign in these situations, you shouldn’t be eligible for the job in the first place.

IMO, it’s because the grand unifying theme of this administration and its members is that their own personal power comes before everything else.

There’s a part of me that suspects Rove understands what comes next. If you peel away all the layers ultimately you end up with Bush and Rove. Even Cheney (and along with him Libby, Addington and the neocons) was only empowered because Rove let him in as a savvy political move at the time it happened. Once Cheney and Gonzales aren’t there to draw fire and deflect criticism who’s going to take the new incoming? Rove and Bush. The plan is to stall. Keep everything going until someone else takes over and when the shit hits the fan deny and blame someone else. Who cares? The administration is over now.

Wolfowitz, well, I don’t think he’s that crucial. The only reason he’s getting the lukewarm backing he’s getting from the White House is because they don’t want to look weak. I’m sure with all the pressure and heat this administration is facing they want to appear to be able to protect their own so nobody starts defecting and turning state’s evidence on all the crap that’s going on. But ultimately, they’ll drop their support. He’s not blocking any fire he’s just generating it.

They won’t resign because the President won’t ask them to, and there’s nothing compelling them to do so. By now, these people must be hanging in the Oval Office like Tony Soprano’s crew marveling at what they’re able to get away with.

Wolfowitz near agreement to resign in face-saving deal

Why didn’t Clinton resign over Whitewater? Because he knew he could get away with it.

Why do people like money?

Dude, no. Just stop that shit right there. The statute of limitations on Whitewater and lying about blowjobs has fucking past. Furthermore, comparing Clinton’s Whitewater deals to this administration’s crimes is like trying to compare a shoplifter to the Virginia Tech campus killer. It’s inappropriate, logically incorrect, and does nothing to address the issue.

Because they feel they have a mandate and they should never have to resign. That’s what elections every 4 years are for.

That’s going to work out just fine by me:

Without endorsing Rimbo’s example, I think he’s correct in a roundabout way. The relevant question is not “Why won’t they resign?” Rather, it’s “What would the administraion gain from having them resign?” And I think the answer is “not much.”

Resigning means admitting an error, or wrong doing. If you say you’re innocent enough times, confuse the issue with friendly stories, enough of the apathetic public just won’t care.

Oliver North was pardoned by Bush Sr. and nobody raised a fuzz.

i believe an appeals court vacated his slap on the wrist, because of his immunized testimony before congress. bush did help cappy and a few other iranamuck scoundrels tho

I’ll agree with inappropriate and with doing nothing to address the issue. This whole thread does nothing to address the issue, if you want to play that game.

Both decisions were done for the same reason, for the exact same reason my kid will deny he dumped his milk on the couch when I’m looking at a fresh puddle on it that smells like sour milk. If you think my statement was “logically incorrect” you must have a different definition for “logic” or “incorrect” from the one the rest of us use.

Your response here and the original post are acting like there’s some kind of inherent genetic flaw in the administration that makes them Evil Bad Guys against those poor, flawed but noble Democrats/Greens/Libertarians/whatevers. Nor is my post some sort of mirror image of that, where I’m one of those degenerate right-wingers trying to divert blame to said flawed, noble Democrats.

It’s all part of human nature, which is non-partisan.

But such ideas may offend you if this is your Faith.

Wrong. I don’t hate these guys because they are not Democrats, I hate them because they are evil, criminal scum that have brought shame to our nation and are completely indifferent to the damage they’re causing. I would have been just as livid if Clinton and his administration were so flagrantly and arrogantly breaking laws and ruining lives, but they never did anything on this scale. NO American administration has ever been this corrupt.

So, Rimbo, are you saying that the Clintons did something wrong in Whitewater? Because those of us in the reality-based community understand that they were exonerated of all wrongdoing.

Unlike Wolfowitz who is certainly guilty. You can make an argument that Gonzalez isn’t, but he’s at least incompetent, if he’s not culpable.

So bringing up the Clintons who were innocent is really the kind of partisan bullshit that you are claiming not to indulge in.

Edit: Ding! 1000th post. Where’s my pie?

Yep. My family were friends one of the original (pre-Starr) investigators, and had the chance to yack about it.

To be fair, Bill was probably clean.

Because those of us in the reality-based community understand that they were exonerated of all wrongdoing.

So was OJ Simpson.

It’s just a difference of degree.

So you agree this administration needs to be impeached and removed from office then?

I don’t think their necessarily evil, nor that there is any ‘flawed nobility’ in what you classify as the rest of the universe, but thanks for including me in your jump to a conclusion. I am actually curious about what happened to the practice of resigning. As I suggested, I wonder if part of it is Cheney, Rumsfeld, and others I think, experiences during the Nixon and Ford administrations. Perhaps Nixon’s resignation was a wound they haven’t let heal? And maybe they set the tone/model for incompetent boobs like Gonzalez. In one of Rumsfeld’s statements about refusing to resign, he did imply that to do that would mean that anyone could basically sabotage him.

Maybe there isn’t a difference, and it’s only my perception.

Granted, you don’t know me. But I tend to not post my firmly held opinions on politics. I don’t think much productive can come than that. I ask questions when I’m curious, and I am.