Some democrats want a new law on the books barring the AG from bringing charges against the Governor or other Dept. heads. The action is in response to Rob Mc Kenna's participation in the multi-state suit against mandatory public health billing.

It's nothing new that the Gov doesn't give a rat's azz whether what she wants is constitutional or not. She reminds me of the "Because I said so" parent. Now her minions are trying to cover up her (and likely their) transgressions.

Gotta love the corruption.

I like how it's a "mandate" when the leader from your chosen party uses their clout to do things, but it's "corruption" when the leader from the other party does the same thing.

Fish on...

Todd

Excuse me? Pour yourself another one, and then let me know what you know. I'm against corruption and closed door deals no matter who instigates it. You? Do you think anything should be done about the gas tax give away to Tribes? Or you didn't have an issue with the "Keep it All" giveaway to casinos?

Do you think I wouldn't be b!tching if the ball was in "the other party's" court? If you do, you're wrong.

Todd, you can get out from under her desk now. It's not always about people you disagree with being wrong. Seems to me, we're all on the same side of being phucked.

Not saying it's right, or wrong, what is happening...just noting how quickly the terminology changes depending on it being an "R" or a "D"...

Fish on...

Todd

The Attorney General works for the people not the governor. So screw Mr. Kline


http://www.seattlepi.com/news/article/New-bill-addresses-power-of-Wash-attorney-general-2570700.php

Especially in Washington State, where the AG, Commissioner of Public Lands, and Governor really share power...much moreseo than other states.

Fish on...

Todd

I loved the Governor's response to Rob McKenna's challenge concerning the Constitutionality of one of the Gov's pet projects. Her indignity went something like this, "I don't know who he represents. It certainly isn't me!"

No sh!t, Lady! Thank God!

The above is a textbook example of why we need a separation of powers.

If either party controlled the executive, legislative, and judicial branches we'd be screwed.

A reasonably ethical judiciary is all that is saving us from the extremeists on both sides.

True enough! But it sometimes comes too close for comfort, IMO.