THE ITCH

So many things to write about and so little time. Wait, that's more an excuse than anything else. Fact is, I missed out on writing about so many relevant (to me, at least) topics because I was just not organized enough in the last few months. A shame.

Lately I have felt the itch. And today the itch became unbearable, and it even has a name: Monica Goodling. And this is regardless of her participation (or not) in the controversial dismissal of U.S. Attorneys back in December 2006.

Let me just say that I dislike and distrust quite a few public officials. Others I find to be, well, dumb. But Monica Goodling - that is a different story. This is someone who really did it for me. She managed to combine all the negative attributes a public official could have and make use of. I am actually horrified.

Not only did she make the wrong decisions, but she had the wrong motivation to begin with. If anyone had any doubts about the negative impact of the Christian conservative takeover of the political arena via the Bush administration, I am hoping Monica Goodling has effectively put those doubts to rest.

A Regent University Law School (think Pat Robertson) graduate (she switched to Regent after a short stint at American University, which I am guessing might have been a bit too secular for her, but might also have saved her from herself had she stayed the course), the young and inexperienced Goodling held too much power in the Attorney General’s office (especially her executive authority over personnel matters) and that was undeniably due to her political affiliation. I am convinced that many others would qualify (and better qualify, mind you) for the position she held; however, I am equally convinced these other apt individuals did not demonstrate the same level of religious fanaticism (sorry, I really cannot think of another word here) and partisanship.

Some nice (and in denial) people claim that Goodling was well-intentioned but inexperienced, and that “she might have somehow figured that she was doing the right thing”. Okay: I think I might be hallucinating here. Could it be that Regent University teaches a different set of laws than that of the United States of America? Is it possible that somewhere in that institution of higher learning students are taught that it is okay to ask those applying for jobs with the Justice Department if they have ever cheated on their spouses? Or who is their favorite president and why? Or favorite Supreme Court Justice? In other words, if they are religious conservatives and Republican?

So a case must be made here - either Goodling intentionally violated federal law by filtering and selecting candidates according to their religious views and political affiliations and/or sympathies, or she is really ignorant of the law. Or both. Either way, she is bad news. And whoever hired her for the job is bad news too (right, we all know who that is). This is partisanship at its worst, but certainly not a surprise given the current administration's track record.