Posted on 04/05/2006 9:00:47 AM PDT by ncountylee
The most stunning aspect of Tom DeLay's resignation from Congress isn't that he was forced out by a wave of bad publicity that began with his indictment last September for breaking a law that wasn't even on the books when DeLay allegedly violated it.
The real surprise of the DeLay debacle is that his fellow Republicans allowed him to be ripped apart by Democrat-friendly media piranha - without firing a shot in return.
Democrats would have surely backed off on their "Culture of Corruption" mantra had the GOP made even a minimal effort to fight fire with fire.
Instead, Hill Republicans looked the other way on one Democrat scandal after another - and will likely end up paying the price by losing control of Congress in November.
Here's a short list of investigations the GOP should have launched - not for reasons of partisan revenge - but because they warranted the full oversight of the party in control of Congress:
• Bergergate: The theft and destruction of top secret national security documents by former National Security Advisor Sandy Berger in a blatant attempt to obstruct the 9/11 Commission investigation.
Berger's crime was easily one of the most serious ever committed by a top government official. Yet the GOP Congress declined to probe further after the Bush Justice Department cut such an embarrassingly light plea bargain that even the Berger case judge was appalled.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...
What were they supposed to do? DeLay himself was behind the rule that forced indicted GOP leaders to step down when he was trying to one-up Dickie Gephardt in the ethics department.
It was ludicrous to think that they could hold open the Majority Leader's job while DeLay was being delayed by Ronnie Earle.
"I assume by that you mean that DeLay is not guilty. Whether he is or not is not germaine to the conversation. What is is that the man has been in the center of a swirl of allegations for a decade, at least. At some point, reasonable people have to either decide there's something to all the sturm und drang or Tom DeLay is the unluckiest individual on the planet."
So has George Bush. I guess there must be something to the ridiculous charges leveled against him, too. I suppose he should resign.
Go back to DU.
He was imprudent in hiring his staff.
Earle had to go to three separate grand juries to get one count of money laundering, which he had to do when he discovered that his conspiracy indictment would likely be thrown out (it was).
I don't ever want you in a foxhole with me if I'm ever falsely accused of something. You'll run like a scared rabbit.
Amen
Make a statement I can't defend? More like I've made a statement you can't COMPREHEND, or more likely, aren't intellectually honest enough (or bright enough) plausible.
I never said he was guilty of anything, just that it was POSSIBLE, and that even if he was guilty of anything (morally, ethically or criminally) it was not for me to say. I'm not a lawyer. I cannot quote Campaign Finance laws by rote. I'm merely a citizen (an intelligent one) who believes that there is something to the allegations, but is unsure if those allegations can or do carry any criminal penalties.
In any case, I don't believe that anyone (of either party) should be allowed to run for or hold any political office while there is an investigation pending against them. That opinion would have held true for BillyBob just as much as for DeLay.
Show me the smear I committed.
Show me the BS I've presented.
You can't. All you can do is engage in relfexive partisanship and accuse me of being a communist and an idiot(by the way, do you have proof of either? Why, I might have a slander case against you, based on your own criteria!).
Go ahead. Attempt to educate me. I even look forward to doing a psychological profile on you based on the nonsense you write. It's good for a laugh, at least.
Great. All you morons can do when someone disagrees with you is post "Go back to DU" or cry to the Mods that you're being exposed to ideas you cannot comprehend, but somehow think are politically dangerous.
The double standards being displayed on this site everyday grow ever more astounding and sickening.
If you wish to go down with the SS DeLay, that's your business. My party can, and should, do better.
I think what we are all afraid of is that this will turn out to be like Newt Gingrich, who as I recall was faced with dozens and dozens of charges and them all dismissed but one. He paid a fine, stepped down, and the IRS cleared him a few years later.
Your problem then. I served in the military for 12 years and never once ran from a foxhole (hard to do on the deck of an aircraft carrier, no?). And who said he was falsely accused? Do you have the grand jury transcript in front of you? Were you in the room when the case was made?
Neither was I. And so I never said he was actually GUILTY of anything, but that from where I sit, it looks bad. I want my party squeaky clean, pal, not full of people for whom I have to hold my nose and support because they simply manage to take my side on one political battle or another.
However, being a reasonable person, I can see trouble when it rears it's ugly head. If DeLay is a scarifical lamb, he's one I'm comfortable in sacrificing. My politics don't begin and end with one issue (like most "conservatives" these days).
And he's a damned good-looking frontrunner for the '08 nomination, no?
Don't need it. The foreman of the grand jury that indicted him for money laundering said he decided there was a case against DeLay when he saw an ad against him from MoveOn.org.
Yes, I'm sure that makes all the other members of the grand jury suspect as well.
Get real. I read a recipe for Strawberry Shortcake in the Reader's Digest recently, doesn't mean said cake is the most wholesome thing I'll ever eat.
Keep lining up your straw men, I'll keep knocking them down.
No, he's not. Newt is through in elective politics.
He's a strategy guy who can't keep his pants zipped.
Let's take advantage of his strategizing OUTSIDE the Oval Office.
No. Everybody else has walked away from you on this thread, shaking his head.
I'm joining them.
I still think Newt has it oiver anyone else mentioned of late:
Pence? Unknown outside his district (except to political junkies) until Ann Coulter annointed him. Although he does have ONE major piece of legislation with his name on it, which is still ONE more than John Kerry.
Giuliani? Good man, but of course, he wore a dress once, is divorced twice, and is pro life. Could win, but couldn't get the nomination if Jesus himself put his imprimitur on him.
Frist? Get Real. Most ineffective Sentae Majority leader since the job was invented.
McCain? McCain's only goal is the advancement of John McCain. I shudder to think what would happen if the man ever got that close to the actual levers of power.
Allen? Ideological candidate. Couldn't get the Titanic survivors to grab a life vest with a $1,000 bill stapled to it.
Rice? Political unknown as far as her positions on issues. Serves primarily as a foilto the predictable democratic mantra that the GOP doesn't "do enough" for blacks or women.
Sorry, but Newt is about all we got right now, although whoever finally wins the beauty contest will be helped far more by the democratic inability to speak coherently or advance a workable agenda than they will by their "appeal" or "principles".
Excuse me,that was supposed to be "pro-Choice" vis-a-vis Giuliani.
Amen to everything you said...
No, in my opinion he's a very poor candidate, unless he has gained some new moral direction since he left the House. He ran around on his wife, and backed down from Clinton way too often. I think he was arrogant too, calling himself a "revolutionary." Of course I can't prove it, but I've always wondered if his own infidelities kept him from addressing Clinton's, or mounting an effective defense of Ken Starr.
That's a poor substitute for justice, if that is all the explanation that Republicans can offer. A man's reputation and possibly freedom are at stake here. Thus far we know he is guilty of hiring people of poor character. This is bad but not illegal, nor does it mean he should be abandoned by his friends.
The R's just ain't what it use to be.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.