Delay live on Fox - Now

[gondramB]

Live on Fox news no link

[mississippi red-neck]

The Democrats always go after the most conservative leaders and the toughest fighters and as usual the Republican Party rolls over and plays dead.

Ever since the Republicans got in power the Democrats have whipped on them like red -headed step children.

They have a majority in both houses of Congress and control the White House and still the Democrats call the shots and even run them out of town.

Republicans have been too busy worrying about winning to do the job they where elected to do. What a bunch of spineless losers.

[weegee]

Will the office remain vacant until next year or will if be filled by special election?

[al_again]

There will always be a compromise of principles in order to retain or gain power. That's a fact of life. Without power conservative principles are not of much use.

I understand what you are saying but I'm beyond fed up with the Republicans. If the last six years is what we get with Republicans in charge, what's the point??? They have done more to advance the liberal agenda than Bill Clinton did.

In short, the Republicans were more effective promoting and passing the conservative agenda when they didn't control the House, Senate, and Presidency.

[AuH2ORepublican]

"I think the sound bite will be "I am more interested in building the Republican majority than my own future."

"Too late for that:
the GOP primary is over, and now there's no GOP candidate in DeLay's district."

---

DeLay is *not* resigning early, he merely decided not to seek reelection. Thus, there won't be a special election, and the winner of the general election in November will commence serving on January 2, 2007, which will be DeLay's last day in office.

Since Texas already held its primaries, and DeLay is the current GOP nominee in the 22nd District (by virtue of having won the primary), the party will get to designate a new GOP nominee for the district. The GOP will not go without a candidate in the election.

[gondramB]

"DeLay is *not* resigning early, he merely decided not to seek reelection. Thus, there won't be a special election, and the winner of the general election in November will commence serving on January 2, 2007, which will be DeLay's last day in office."


------

>>WASHINGTON // Succumbing to scandal, former Majority Leader Tom DeLay said today he is resigning from Congress in the face of a tough re-election race, closing out a career that blended unflinching conservatism with a bare-knuckled political style.<<

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/nationworld/bal-delay0404,0,163299.story?coll=bal-home-headlines

---

>>WASHINGTON - Rep. Tom DeLay will announce today that he will not seek re-election and will leave Congress within months, congressional aides said yesterday.<<<
http://www.kentucky.com/mld/heraldleader/news/nation/14257339.htm

[demkicker]

I don't know where you got your news, but I heard DeLay himself say he would "step down" sometime in June. Gives the party time to come up with another viable candidate and Perry will call a special election to replace him.

[plain talk]

Yes. They have been a major disappointment but the results don't support your statements fully. By the Republicans being in charge we had a major tax cut, invasion of two countries in support of the WOT and 2 SC justices. Had the dems been in charge none of this would have happened.

We should continue to prod the Republicans but never cave to the notion that it doesn't matter who is in charge. One only has to look at who the committee chairmen would been if the dems were in charge to imagine the havoc. There would be impeachment hearings right now FCOL.

So while I'm dissapointed I never forget that it can always be worse.

[AuH2ORepublican]

My mistake. I read about DeLay's announcement on FoxNews.com, and while the headline said he was "resigning" the story itself only said that he had announced he wasn't seeking reelection. I apologize for the misunderstanding.

With DeLay resigning at some point prior to November, Governor Perry would have the choice of calling a special election or leaving the seat vacant until the new Congress convenes on January 2, 2007. I assume that Perry won't make his decision until after DeLay's replacement on the November ballot has been designated by the GOP (especially since DeLay may not have even resigned by such date), so if Perry calls for a special election the GOP's November nominee would hopefully be the only serious Republican running in the special election.

[al_again]

Results:

National dept is 68% of GDP (This should scare the hell out of everyone)

Prescription drug benefit (Medicaid is a bigger disaster than social security and will be bankrupt by 2011)

McCain-Feingold (Who needs a constitution)

Iraq war (What would be better with Saddam or a Shia(Iran) dominated Iraq government???)

These results are absolutely pathetic.

[linda_22003]

No - he has said he is leaving in June.

[mwl1]

Concur. National Review has good info on the possible successors.

This is good for the GOP; horrible political news for the RATS, Pelosi, the news media, and most especially the vile Nick Lampson.

[AuH2ORepublican]

"National Review has good info on the possible successors."

---

Do you have a link? I checked The Corner and NR's homepage and couldn't find anything.

[plain talk]

All of those things would have been worse under dem leadership in Congress. Politics is about comparative analysis.

[VictoryGal]

> On C-SPAN this morning, they were saying that if he withdraws by a certain date, he's eligible to keep the money in his campaign coffers to convert to his legal defense fund. I guess he thinks he'll need it. :-\

Oh my God, is this really true??? If so-- I'm p***ed!! I actually gave money to his campaign since he is one of the few GOPers with a spine. I paid out my good money to get him back in office, and now he rolls over and is going to spend my money defending himself against criminal charges?

What in God's name is happening to my beloved GOP? Have they been taken over by aliens? (Given the sieve-like nature of the border, I have to wonder)

[Freee-dame]

McCarthy was right (and he did not lead the charge, HCUA existed back to the 1930s).

McCarthy was a Senator. He was involved with the Army-McCarthy hearings. These hearings looked at possible communists working in the Federal government.

HCUA, which dealt with Hollywood blacklists, was in the House of Representatives. If the MSM wanted Americans to know the difference, they would not try to make it seem that McC went after Hollywood.

[linda_22003]

As I say, that's what was being discussed on C-SPAN this morning. I was in rush hour traffic, so I didn't hear exactly what they were reading from. In today's Washington Post, there is an item:

"DeLay also is entitled under federal election rules to convert any or all of the remaining funds from his reelection campaign to his legal expenses, whether or not he resigns, is indicted or loses the election. Election lawyers say one advantage of bowing out of the election now is that the campaign cash can be converted to pay legal bills immediately, instead of being drained in the course of a bid to stay in office.

As of Feb. 15, when his campaign filed its most recent report with the Federal Election Commission, DeLay had $1,295,350 on hand. But that was two weeks before the Texas primary in which DeLay bested three Republican rivals to win renomination, and the pot of money available to him now may be considerably less.

By stepping aside so early in an election year, a lawmaker "wouldn't be spending to be reelected" and could transfer the funds immediately to fend off any federal charges, said lawyer Kenneth A. Gross, a former head of the FEC's enforcement division. The last lawmaker to gain the FEC's formal approval for such a transfer was Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham (R-Calif.), who resigned last November after pleading guilty to evading taxes and accepting bribes."

So, it looks like yes, you contributed not to his campaign, but to his defense. I was kind of wondering why no one really noticed what I posted earlier.

[VictoryGal]

> So, it looks like yes, you contributed not to his campaign, but to his defense.

This stinks. I've already let my party know they are not getting another dime from me unless they start acting like Republicans again, and this just cements my decision. In fact, I have started sending them notes in the reply envelopes they send for donations. They start out: "When the GOP stood for lower spending and strong security, this envelope was always filled with at least $100. Not anymore. Here's what you can do to get my money again..."

[al_again]

Politics is just like business - you don't keep around incompetent employees because you think new ones might be worse. You fire the incompetent ones, and if the next group is the same or worse, you fire them too. Eventually you will get competent people (and usually faster than you think). If you don't fire them, don't expect the situation to change (and it needs to change).

My vote in the next election is going to be used to fire the current incompetent employees!

[linda_22003]

I agree with you. I worked for the RNC many years ago, and I can tell you that they open those envelopes and look for checks. Period. So I'm not sure they'll read your letter, but they will notice that what they were looking for is not inside.

(PS - this is not a slam at the RNC, I'm sure other political organizations work exactly the same way).

[plain talk]

Well you certainly don't fire an employee and replace them with any even more incompetent one (dem)! That's Comparative Politics 101 and basic logic.

Your analogy doesn't hold up very well because you are not the sole employer and able to pick a replacement. There are not a large field of candidates to choose from but rather a very small number who decide to run. So what happens is you try to influence others in the mob to vote for the better candidate and ensure the less competent one doesn't get in.