Last mission to repair the Hubble telescope Hubble space telescope discoveries have enriched our understanding of the cosmos. In this special report, you will see facts about the Hubble space telescope, discoveries it has made and what the last mission's goals are.
For their own good
Fifty years ago, they were screwed-up kids sent to the Florida School for Boys to be straightened out. But now they are screwed-up men, scarred by the whippings they endured. Read the story and see a video and portrait gallery.
Fill out this form to email this article to a friend
Gonzales may be gone, but his mess remains
By E.J. DIONNE, Washington Post Writers Group
Published August 28, 2007
WASHINGTON - The resignation of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales is only the beginning of accountability, not the end of it. His decision to leave underscores the need for a public reckoning of the extent to which the Justice Department was politicized under his stewardship.
But how divisive the coming months will be depends hugely on whom Bush names to succeed Gonzales, and on whether Republicans in Congress are thinking more about Bush's legacy or their own.
Gonzales was forced to go not because of Democratic opposition, but because many in President Bush's own party - notably and honorably Sen. Arlen Specter - were appalled by his performance.
The new politics unleashed by Gonzales' resignation were clear from the moment that word of his departure began to circulate. Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, set the tone early, telling CNN: "This will not bring peace. This will bring more chaos." Note that "chaos" will now be the new definition of accountability.
President Bush stayed partisan to the end, charging that Gonzales' "good name was dragged through the mud for political reasons." No concessions, no admissions, no regrets.
Democrats, publicly and privately, pledged not to back off investigating what went wrong on Gonzales' watch. But whether that journey toward the truth occurs in a deliberate or a partisan way depends, in part, on how leading Republican members of Congress judge their current obligations and their long-term interests. With Gonzales gone and with Bush set to finish his term in less than a year and a half, the GOP could cut itself loose from one of the shabbier aspects of this presidency.
Or the party could fight on for Bush, and hope to bury the issues raised by the attorney general's tenure beneath months of angry invective.
Bush could significantly relieve the pressure by making an above-politics choice as Gonzales' replacement. Sen. Charles E. Schumer, D-N.Y., one of Gonzales' sharpest critics, sent a strong signal in an interview, saying that "if you have an attorney general who puts the rule of law first ... you could find out what happened under Gonzales pretty quickly and move on."
However, even the least partisan and most qualified nominee will not escape tough hearings.
Bush's appointee will need to make an unbreakable commitment not to use prosecutions and investigations - particularly questionable allegations of voter fraud - to influence the outcome of the 2008 elections. A successor should also pledge to get to the bottom of the firing of nine U.S. attorneys in the middle of the president's time in office.
At the same time, the nominee will need to restore faith that the extraordinary powers granted government in the name of fighting terrorism are not abused, and are subjected to serious oversight. Schumer said that Bush may have let Gonzales go in part because only a fresh attorney general could successfully negotiate a new terrorist surveillance bill with Congress this fall.
The model for President Bush to ponder as Gonzales' successor is obvious. When Gerald Ford took over from Richard Nixon, the Justice Department was in shambles, discredited by political abuse and corruption at the top. In naming a new attorney general, Ford turned not to a political crony, but to Edward Levi, the president of the University of Chicago. Levi's reputation as a man of integrity almost instantly restored the department's standing.
Levi understood the danger of seeing all "human relationships ... in terms of power relationships - in terms of the manipulation of power," as he put it in a 1976 essay for Newsweek magazine.
"I really think that's one of the most wicked ways of looking at the world," Levi went on. "It strips people of their humanness. It converts all the other good attributes people have into just an ability or a desire to manipulate others."
Justice desperately needs a new Edward Levi. So does Bush.