The George W. Bush Interview

[A Large Regular as shocked when President Bush not only accepted our invitation to be interviewed but also agreed to answer questions about the Alberto Gonzalez situation. Here is the interview. Enjoy.]

ALR: Mr. President thank you so much for joining us. I must say that I'm surprised that you chose this venue to speak out on the Alberto Gonzalez situation.

GWB: Glad to be here Chris. I don't mind doin' some straight talkin' to people with open minds and are willing to listen to reason and facts. I do mind John Conyers or Pat Leahy thinkin' my people should be at their beck and call.

ALR: I'll be honest and say that until this new angle of some sort of Constitutional showdown - I really wasn't paying any attention to the firing of these eight federal prosecutors.

GWB: Well that's not surprising Chris. Most average Americans didn't pay much attention to the firing of the eight lawyers. In the first place most average people have no sympathy for lawyers in high position who are suddenly out of a job and secondly most average people know what a job review is all about. I mean it was eight out of ninety-three. Any company that has adopted Jack Welsh's management practices regularly sees 10% of the workforce culled to make room for people who could do a better job or at least do the job equally well. We did our reviews and we decided that these eight people were going to be let go to make room for eight new lawyers.

ALR: The way I understand it all the lawyers are appointed anyway - so they are in effect employees at will. You don't even have to have cause - you can replace people at will. Also the firing of lawyers has always been the prerogative of the President. Why is Congress making a big deal out of this?

GWB: Well its not Congress so much. It really comes down to two groups - those who want to try to use any excuse to embarrass this Administration and those who think that any government job should be for life. Neither of these people care what the truth is - they just want a fight. Well I for one am not going to back down to these people. Its not like we'd be risking losing their votes. [GWB chuckles]

ALR: Well speaking of votes - couldn't this confrontation turn into an issue for the 2008 elections?

GWB: I sure hope so. Listen Chris - we drag this out and what happens? I'll tell you. Suddenly the nation starts seeing more and more of Pat Leahy and John Conyers and our studies have shown that nothing turns off independent voters off more than smug, self-righteous blowhards. Can you think of anyone more smug and self-righteous than Pat Leahy? He's like a huge gift for the Republicans. Also - if these people are serious about a fight then they by default make it a campaign issue for the Democratic candidates too. Soon they will have to answer whether if elected they will keep all the current lawyers in place or if they will fire them and bring in their own people. If they say that they will bring in their own people - then the candidates have to say that this is just a political smokescreen by people who just want a fishing expedition. Can you imagine it if the candidates started saying that they would keep all these Republican lawyers on the job? [GWB chuckles again]

ALR: Aren't you afraid of a bad precedent being set here? What if Karl Rove and Harriet Miers are forced to give testimony?

GWB: There are two political realities that have to be faced here and calmer heads within the Democratic Party should realize what is at stake. This isn't a question about Executive Privilege - this is a question of privacy. If a Congressional committee can force people at the highest levels of government to reveal their secrets - open up their private diaries if you will - then what protections exist for the average citizen? Remember - no crime has been committed - but yet Rove and Miers are expected to answer to a Democrat inquisition? Monty Python parodies of the Democrats can't be far behind. And if the general perception becomes that the Democrats want to big brother your secrets while the Republicans want to big brother the secrets of terrorists - then I think we all know how the 2008 elections will turn out.

ALT: You said their was two political realities. The first is that this is really about privacy. What is the second?

GWB: Well I'm a two-term President with no Vice-President running for election in 2008. History says that the Democrats should have a clear edge because voters like change. That's the fact. However, it also looks like the House and Senate may return to the Republicans in 2008. How ironic if the tactics of having top aides testify is set now but really used by a Republican Congress against a new Democrat President? What will that blowhard Pat Leahy say then? Smart people know to be careful of what you wish for.

ALR: Thank you so much for joining us and shedding light on this subject.

GWB: My pleasure Chris.