I’m not a big fan of Tom DeLay, but I must admit that this election result gave me a nice big smile.
SUGAR LAND, Tex., March 7 — Rep. Tom DeLay won the Republican nomination in his House reelection bid Tuesday, beating three challengers in his first election since he was indicted and forced to step aside as majority leader.
With 14 percent of the precincts reporting, DeLay had 10,005 votes, or 64 percent. His closest challenger, environmental lawyer Tom Campbell, had 4,049 votes, or 26 percent.
I’m happy not because DeLay won his primary battle but because Ronnie Earle, the hackiest hack prosecutor outside of Elliot Spitzer, is probably having a foam-flecked hissy fit wherever he is right now.
I’m happy because DeLay proves that voters can see through a nearly blindig screen of sham prosecutions that, to my thinking, came very close to misconduct, to vote for a man they believe would continue to represent them well in the US Congress. I’m not saying that DeLay is a saint. He’s surely not. I don’t like his politics and I don’t like how he plays the Congressional game.
But I like Ronnie Earle even less and I’m glad that years of his work have come to absolutely naught.
Hey, Who Left the Door Open UPDATE: Welcome to the readers of the Daou Report! I’m happy to have visitors from either side of the idological spectrum so long as they mind their manners and try to add some substance to the conversation.
Allow me to note, by way of this update, that I’m not especially a fan of Tom DeLay. I’m on his side in this because I believe he’s been railroaded by a hack prosecution. I’m on DeLay’s side here for the same reason I’ve been on Martha Stewart’s side: I don’t like seeing anyone run afoul of a public official with a grudge.
I believe, based on everything I know about Earle and his prosecution of DeLay that this is a politically-motivated prosecution. You’re not likely to dissuade me of that notion, especially given how Earle has behaved toward DeLay specifically and Republicans in general.
There’s More Than This UPDATE: Hey, folks. Why just stay in one little corner of the sandbox? I’ve got a big blog here and there’s plenty to read and send to your friends. Roam around, get a real sense of the place, leave a few sage comments. Remember, nothing here is personally directed against you, so relax.
Oh, and if you’re feeling generous, help me out. I’d appreciate it greatly.
DeLay Tries to Fight Off GOP Challengers
Rep. Tom DeLay tried to beat back three challengers for the Republican nomination Tuesday in his fir
You’re happy Delay won? So are the Democrats. All his primary victory proved is that he’s still the most popular with Republicans – not the general electorate. A non-indicted candidate would have been much harder for Democrats to defeat in November. Ronnie Earle is no doubt break-dancing rather than foaming – because DeLay’s victory in the republican primary practically guarantees a Democratic victory in the Fall.
Tom the Bugman may well already be serving time by the time the polls open.
Bob, I’ll bet you two things happen. 1) DeLay wins the general election; 2) DeLay doesn’t go to jail.
You really think that a Dem strategy of calling average Republican voters in a Red State idiots is going to work for them? If so, I’m fairly sure you could get a job with Howard Dean and the DNC. They have the same strategy nationally and look how amazingly successful they’ve been with it.
If you believe that Earle’s motive is only to unseat DeLay, then I suspect he will have the last laugh:
“While no independent polls were taken for the primary, a poll taken in January by the Houston Chronicle found that DeLay’s support in his district was 22 percent. Only about half of those who voted for him in 2004 said they would do so again.”
http://www.chron.com/disp/stor.....06683.html
In his lengthy career Earle has indicted far more Democrats than Republicans. If you choose to believe the spin that this is some sort of personal attack, that’s your business. But you are clearly misinformed.
http://mediamatters.org/items/200510060001
Personally I cannot wait until the voters throw DeLay’s corrupt, worthless ass out of office. I have friends in Sugarland who are embarassed to even talk about him.
Ah yes, the unbiased source MediaMatters.
Note that of all the people listed by that group, only two of them are Federal politicians. Both of those are Republicans. Also note what MM does not say, that Earle was an enthusiastic speaker and fundraiser for John Kerry’s Presidential campaign while he was in the midst of seeking an indictment for DeLay.
I’d say the charges of partisan are pretty apt, considering his behavior of the last few years.
Election laws and money laundering laws are for little people. Oh, sorry, let me rephrase that…
Being an enthusiastic speaker and fundraiser for John Kerry’s Presidential Campaign doesn’t make one partisan.
I (originally from MA, and someone who NEVER voted for John Kerry before 2004) was a big supporter of Kerry’s Presidential campaign.
Reason: It had to do with who he was running against.
Speaking of ham sandwiches (I’m sure that line is coming), I’d have voted for one (or a doorknob, or a rock, or a leftover piece of pizza, etc) over GWB.
As for DeLay. So corrupt he makes Ken Lay look like Mother Theresa.
Hate to break it to you, TX Republicans ARE morons (of course I mean those that aren’t profiting off of TD’s corruption).
Jimmie – you’re an idiot, so I won’t take your money, but for the record, here’s my predictions: No way DeLay will win re-election; He will be convicted; whether or not he’ll serve actual time is anohter story. Oh – by the way – we’re still just talking about state charges – in all liklihood there will be additional Federal charges as fallout from the Abramoff investigation. Bug Boy will be a multiple felon before school is out on this.
It’s true that the only federal politicians Earle has indicted have been Republicans. I can think of a two reasons why that might be:
- Until recently, Texans did not send many Republicans to federal office.
- Perhaps the Democrats we’d been sending were obeying the law.
However if you actually read the list of Democrats he has prosecuted, you’ll see they were serious crimes committed by high level politicians. I don’t see how one can simply ignore this clear record of Democratic prosecutions. After 22 years of prosecuting Democratic politicians he’s suddenly become this mad, out-of-control, partisan prosecutor.
I find that hard to believe. Earle’s record shows that he pursues powerful politicians who have broken the law. DeLay is (was) one of the most powerful politicians in Texas, and there was enough evidence that he broke the law to convince a grand jury.
FYI: MediaMatters does not claim to be non-partisan. Are you suggesting something in the article was false?
Colin, what I’m suggesting is that Earle is partisan at least when it comes to his prosecution of Federal Officials from Texas. That he was out there publicly raising cash for Kerry at an event outside of Texas proves, at the very least, that he had picked a side. That he did so while in the midst of the DeLay investigation proves that he has poor impulse control.
bob lewis – Well, that’s one great debate tactic you have going there. Look, we’ll put your prediction against mine and see whose Kung-Fu is stronger in November.
Robert – Aside from your apparent lack of a dictionary, you suffer from the same malady that’s put the Democrats firmly in the political minority in the past 8 years. You hold the majority of voters in contempt.
Look, I’ll give you something you can try. Give it a year or so and tell me how it works. Instead of merely showing up and saying that most of the voters in your state are idiots, try actually engaging them on an issue or three. Give them some options to what they other guys are doing isntead of simply saying that the other guys are evil baby-killers. Give voters an actual option instead of denigrating their intelligence.
Is 22% now a majority?
Makes sense if you believe 51% is a mandate, I suppose.
Who is the idiot running this website? To call Eliot Spitzer and Ronnie Earle hacks because they put ‘corrupt’ people in prison is living in denial. That person has no moral, ethics, or sense of decency, and evidently doesn’t know right from wrong. You are probably some Gay Cowboy from Texas who is insulted that he has been ‘outed’ by Broke Back Mountain.
Who is “me” who can’t read the upper left corner of the blog?
Jonathan, what 22 percent? DeLay gathered 64 percent of the voters in the primary.
Tell you what, then, Jimmie, how much you want to bet? My understanding is DeLay now faces what many consider a real contest — a general election fight against an organized, well-funded Democrat with a score to settle AND a former Republican congressman running as an independent.
The Democrat, Nick Lampson, unopposed in Tuesday’s primary, represented a district adjacent to DeLay’s for four terms until it was redrawn in a redistricting plan engineered by DeLay.
Steve Stockman, a former Republican congressman, will be running as an independent and taking Republican votes away from DeLay.
DeLay’s Political Death Greatly Exaggerated
So much for claims that all the swirling accusations about Abramoff and the Earle investigations hurting DeLay’s reelection chances. While he won the primary, it doesn’t mean that his reelection in the general elections is assured.
Jimmie:
“Colin, what I’m suggesting is that Earle is partisan at least when it comes to his prosecution of Federal Officials from Texas. That he was out there publicly raising cash for Kerry at an event outside of Texas proves, at the very least, that he had picked a side. That he did so while in the midst of the DeLay investigation proves that he has poor impulse control.”
OK, so when Earle is investigating Republican federal officials from Texas he’s a partisan. When he’s indicting and convicting non-federal Democratic officials from Texas (for 22 years) he’s non-partisan. It’s clear to me now.
The event to which you are referring, I believe, was a fundraiser for the Texas Values In Action Coalition, a recently-formed PAC in North Texas. They seek to influence Texas elections, not federal elections, and the $100,000 raised at the event at which Earle spoke had nothing to do with Kerry’s presidential campaign. http://www.texvac.org
If you know of another event where Earle was raising cash for Kerry, I’d appreciate a link.
I think that 22% number was reference to the Chronicle’s January poll.
But Republican strategist Allen Blakemore predicted DeLay would win with at least 60 percent of the vote. “We have awakened the sleeping giant,” Blakemore said.
And that sleeping giant rolled over, farted, and then went back to sleep.
Its nice to see that Republicans are aiming low.
The high bigotry of low expectations.
Man, its like shooting fish in a barrel.
Well, shingles, he did pull over 60 percent of the primary vote, so there’s that.
I suppose my question here is why there’s an assumption that I’m a DeLay booster. I do prefer DeLay to Earle, but that’s like saying I prefer brussel sprouts to liver.
Yes, he did hit that magic number didn’t he.
In a Republican primary contest.
Where only the most committed (pun intended) bother to vote.
And he’s the incumbent.
Rather, I was making fun of the bozo who said that getting 60% of Republican voters is akin to awakening a sleeping giant.
But I wholeheartedly congratulate DeLay on hitting that awesome giant rousing percentage, all the same.
By the ways, I’m one of those oddballs who actually like brussel sprouts.
Not liver though.
shingles, don’t cont DeLay out of anything. If he’s proven nothing else in his time as a member of Congress, it’s that he knows how to win elections.
Hey, 60 percent is nothing to sneeze at. We haven’t seen a US President get that large a percentage in quite a while.
Yeah, yeah, I know. Tough election…foes outta the woodwork…Jesus rising from the dead to run against him..ghost of Lyndon Johnson advising his opponents…Tom Landry coming out of retirement. I got it. Still, I’m pretty sure that DeLay has faced tough contests before in his own campaigns and in campaigns to get legislation passed. He’s managed to win the big ones. I’d not bet against him on this one either.
Again from Houston Chronicle:
U.S. Rep. Tom DeLay seldom has had Republican primary opposition since he was elected to the House in 1984. When he has, he’s won in landslides:
• 1986-1994: Unopposed
• 1996: 80 percent of vote
• 1998: Unopposed
• 2000: 83 percent
• 2002: 80 percent
• 2004: Unopposed
http://www.chron.com/disp/stor.....08257.html
Let me add 2006: 62%
He is going to lose. You won’t bet against him, so are you willing to bet for him? I’ll take that bet.
And with any luck, raving, out-of-control, recently-become-partisan Earle will see to it the corrupt thief spends some time in prison, too.
Jimmie,
The comment about Texas Republicans being morons was based on Tom DeLay (who couldn’t give a sh** about them for anything but their vote) giving DeLay 60% of the vote. What’s in it for them?????
DeLay has also proven that he knows how to sell out the common man for corporate interests. So he’s got that going for him.
Dictionary?
Robert – What they have going for them is exactly the same thing that, say West Virginians have going for them when they vote for Robert Byrd. He may be bad for the country or bad for politics, but he’s damned good at bringing home the bacon for Texas and, in his time, he’s cemented the Republican party’s hold on Texas for a long time to come. You say he doesn’t care about the common man. The common man, at least in Texas, appears to heartily disagree with you.
Why wouldn’t they vote for the scoundrel they know will do pretty much when they need him to do instead of the angel they don’t know?
I don’t like that arrangement myself, but that’s the way we’ve decided politics must work these days. How can you really blame people for playing the game according to the rules we’ve made?
Colin – You do know that Earle’s case has been unraveling pretty much since the day he brought it before the grand juries. He got one – only one – indictment on the last possible day and even those charges are hanging by a thread. I’d be a little surprised if the trial ever saw a jury deliberation, much less a guilty verdict.
Here’s a question for all you good Texans:
Q. Why did Texas break away from Mexico?
A. Because slavery was illegal in Mexico. Yes, that’s right, folks, Davey Crockett and Jim Bowie died for the sacred right to own slaves. Hoorah for the Lone Star State!
Earle got several indictments for money laundering and conspiracy to violate the Texas election code. In December the conspiracy charges were thrown out. Earle appealed — the case is on hold.
Personally I’d be satisfied with a money laundering conviction. It is a first degree felony after all.
“…but that’s the way we’ve decided politics must work these days. How can you really blame people for playing the game according to the rules we’ve made?”
Were you trying to be funny? When DeLay doesn’t like the rules he breaks them or changes them. House Ethics Committee not bending over quickly enough? Throw the non-compliant out and get some patsies in there. You might recall he wanted to change the rule that forced him to step down once he was indicted. That was so obnoxious, and caused such an uproar, that not even the spineless Republicans in the House were willing to do it.
Can’t use corporate funds to finance Texas campaigns? No problem, just launder the money through the RNC first then send it on down. Rules are for losers — I’ve got a state to redistrict!
To mention “rules” and “DeLay” in the same breath is laughable.
Edited by the site administrator.
Sorry, bub. That one was over the line.
Colin – REgarding the “rules changing”, now you’re just being obtuse. Sure DeLay changed the rules he could change. Since when is that new? You know as well as I do (or you should, if you don’t) that changing the rules is a game that’s as old as Congress itself. Every majority has used its power to make life easier for itself and harder for the opposition. That’s one of the perks of being the majority.
We can argue about whether the rules should be that easy to change (though I suspect that you and I would be on the same side of that argument) but you can’t feign disgust at Delay’s use of the procedures that the Dems have been using for four decades.
Your contention that DeLay laundered money is by no means the certainty you say it is. It is, in fact, the dispute at the heart of the charges. Earle has his evidence (wasn’t there something about a document produced by his office in there somewhere?) and DeLay has his. The courts will hear it out and we’ll know when we know. If he broke the law, he’ll get the sentence he deserves. If not…well…if not, then what?
bob lewis – You really don’t want top open up the slavery discussion as a stalwart defender of all things Democrat, do you?
When it comes to breaking long-standing procedures, I think it’s clear the Republicans in recent years are way ahead of the Democrats. I can’t be bothered to make a list of the series of bent, changed and broken rules in both House and Senate over the last 6 years. One example: Just last week Frist threatened to remake the Senate Intelligence Committee, breaking 30 years of tradition, if it had the temerity to do its job and investigate Bush’s warrantless spying program. I could go on.
It’s true, though, that the farce that is the House Ethics Committee is a product of both parties. Even before DeLay bought its allegiance it had neutered itself.
It’s common lately, now that GOP corruption is so obvious and well publicized, for some to say “that’s how the game is played”, etc. While it’s true that both parties have corrupt officials, I’d like to see an example of Democratic corruption that even approaches the level of DeLay & Abramoff’s K Street project.
Of course DeLay has not yet been convicted of money laundering. I got a little ahead of myself.
I have to get going, but I appreciate the discussion. I haven’t had a civilized conversation on a right-leaning blog in a while.
Let me get this straight. District attorneys in Texas are elected, likely requiring them to belong to one of the two major political parties. They have to campaign for election like any other politician. And your accusation against Earle is that he engages in partisan politics? I don’t care if he raised a million dollars for Kerry; that’s what Democrats do for other Democrats. I’m not sure where it’s written that District Attorneys, out of all the elected officials in the state, are supposed to refrain from partisan politics. It’s something of a high school debating team argument to claim that because Earle is a partisan politician, then any prosecution of a political figue is based strictly on partisan politics.
By the same token, you trumpet Delay’s 60% vote total in the primary as somehow demoinstrating that he has strong support. As another commenter pointed out, he has never had less than 80% in any previous primary. And befote you make the case that he’s never had a serious challenger before, the very fact that there were multiple challengers is a sign of weakness. I think he’s in big trouble in November. Or he may win. But this primary definitely does not support the argument that he’s on the good foot.
Colin, I’ve quite enjoyed our back and forth here. I hope that you come back around and leave more comments. You’re the kind of person I enjoy talking to, even if we don’t agree politically.
Yeah, Republicans have rolled in the mud. They’re no different than their Democratic counterparts like Jim Wright and those who helped trigger the Gingrich Revolution. They were as into gaming the system as any Republican Congressman is today. Abramoff doesn’t work for me because when you look at who gave what to whom and how, each party was getting their share of cash and favors from him and his firms and those he represented. The point is not which side is dirtier and when. The point, at this point, is that there’s a problem and it needs to be fixed. We know that our elected officials don’t have a vested interest into limiting their own power (though I happen to think that Senator Frist was on the right track in limiting Congress from intruding on the President’s Constitutional obligations) unless we make it very clear that they must or face being turned out of a job.
I’ve said quite plainly that I’m no great fan of Tom DeLay. I’m only a fan of his when my other choice is Ronnie Earle. I’m sure that due to political considerations, most folks who have come here from Mr. Daou’s site see things quite the other way. No real surprise, I’ll bet, right?
Here’s the real question. Since we both agree, I believe, that the system itself is wide open to the sort of self-aggrandizing games that neither of us like, what do we to to repair it?
“bob lewis – You really don’t want top open up the slavery discussion as a stalwart defender of all things Democrat, do you?”
No, jimmie, I’m indicating my disdain for all things Texan – personally I think Democrats suck – it’s just that they don’t suck near as much as ignorant Republicans do . . . and when it’s an ignorant Texan Republican it’s a hat trick . . . like the Chimpresident.
Tom DeLay is a criminal at worst, and is pushing the boundaries of honest public service at best. Why send someone to Washington if there is even a small chance that this person is taking advantage of the system. It’s time for regular Americans to stop believing that politicians are all doing something corrupt, so that’s normal and acceptable. These politicians are taking advantage of every hardworking person who pays their taxes, obeys the law, and hopes that the people they vote for are actually working for their best interests.
DeLay clearly works for his own best interest as much as he does for his constituents. He takes money from lobbyists who are promoting terrible working conditions in the Northern Marianas Islands. Young women are forced to work long hours for small pay, some forced into prostitution and reports of forced abortions when they become pregnant. Rather than investigate these allegations, the “devout” christian DeLay has used his clout to prevent any investigations into these deplorable reports. Lobbyists have payed for him and other members of Congress to visit the Marianas, and have contributed to his PACs.
So, if you believe DeLay is a better public servant than Ronnie Earle, you are either an idiot or a scumbag. Do you think DeLay is doing the best possible job a congressman can do? Why defend this guy? If you’re a Republican, find an upstanding Republican to run for office and replace DeLay. Defending him simply because he’s a powerful conservative is totally hypocritical. He doesn’t stand for anything more than acheiving power at all costs. If that’s what you look for in a public official, you’re a real jerk.
It seems like you’d rather support a Republican, simply because he’s a member of the GOP than bother to find out the facts yourself and stand up for your own convictions…..unless your convictions include breaking campaign laws, promoting the abuse of human rights for personal gain, and using your position of power to enrich yourself. It certainly is easier to just smear Earle in response, but it’s a sad statement about how far you’re willing to go to keep a Republican majority. What does it even mean to be a Republican anymore?
Fresho-Electro – I dispute your “logic” and your conclusion. You assume that I am a Republican. I am not. You assume that I wish to preserve a Republican majority. I particularly do not care which party is in power, so long as my own political philosophy is represented fully and with as much presence as possible.
I believe that DeLay is emblematic of the Congress in at least the last twenty years, if not the last forty. I believe that he’s a creature perfectly adapted to a system that rewards bad behavior and punishes good behavior. I believe that the entire reason the system exists in its current form is because we allow it to remain so.
That said, I abhor more the blatant abuse of a public position that Ronnie Earle has exhibited in the last few years. I find Earle more repugnant because he is willing to use his power to push forward tendentious prosecutions regardles of the strength of his evidence. He is Don Quixote minus any possible nobility tilting at windmills. DeLay’s only redeeming point in my eyes is that he has sought not only his own advantage but the advantage of his constituents and his fellow Republican Representatives. Anyone who says that he’s only been out for himself is simply ignorant of his history as a Representative.
You call me a jerk and an idiot or a scumbag. I’m sorry that you’ve chosen not to discuss the issue but to hurl invective. I believe that you’d have a bright future as a Democratic Senator, if you chose to go that route. You’d fit right in.
Jimmie -
You say Earle prosecutes “regardless of the strength of his evidence”.
Are you saying he’s managed to hoodwink the grand jury?
You say you want your political views represented; Is this why
you vote for “a creature perfectly adapted to a system that rewards bad behavior”?
You say DeLay has “only [one] redeeming point”. You’re willing to vote for someone if he brings home the bacon, even if it’s “bad for the country or bad for politics”. I think that’s very selfish, not to mention shortsighted.
You say the system sucks, but you keep on supporting it because you think it’s good for YOU. Maybe you’d favor me with a list of the 5 best things Tom DeLay did for you. (Is redrawing legislative districts to disadvantage Democrats your idea of a good thing for the people of TX? If so perhaps you don’t consider Democrats Texans?)
There’s a simple answer to your query (reproduced below):
DON’T REWARD CROOKS WITH YOUR VOTE!
Fred
Jimmie said:
Here’s the real question. Since we both agree, I believe, that the system itself is wide open to the sort of self-aggrandizing games that neither of us like, what do we to to repair it?
Well, Fred, let me ask you a couple questions of my own before I answer.
1) What makes you think I’ve ever voted for Tom DeLay?
2) What gives you the impression that I support the system, especially considering the many comments I’ve left in this thread that have very plainly said that I don’t?
3) On a scale of 1-10, where would you rate my like for Tom DeLay, based on my post and this entire comment thread. On what do you base your belief?
Give me some quick answers to those and I’ll answer your questions.
1) It doesn’t matter to me whether you’ve ever voted for him, the fact that you’ve got a “nice big smile” on your face is sufficient reason for me to take issue with your politics. If you haven’t voted for him, congratulations on your good sense.
On the other hand, it’s clear you *would* vote for him. Am I wrong? Or are you just applauding those who did?
2) The fact that you *would* vote for him. This is a very important point, Jimmie. And let’s not split hairs. The lesser of two evils argument just doesn’t cut it. The “crook that I know” doesn’t cut it. If you don’t like the system then you have to vote for candidates who will change it and against those who are “perfectly adapted to it”. And not be writing blog posts about how happy you are when they win!
3) I don’t think you can have it both ways. You’ve got a nice big smile, I don’t. Therein lies the difference. If you want to know why liberals have contempt for TX Republican voters, this is the reason.
Regards,
Fred
Fred, you appear to be under the mistaken notion that I am a TX Republican voter. The truth is that I am a MD Libertarian voter (and, as such, can not even vote in my own state’s primary elections).
You also mistake my happiness. My smile is because DeLay managed not to be hurt very much by what I consider to be a very thin politically-based prosecution by Ronnie Earle. It wouldn’t bother me one bit if a reform-minded person stepped up to the plate, cleaned DeLay’s clock in the election, then managed to get some of those systemic changes into Congress that I’m sure we’d all like to see. I want ten or fifteen Newt Gingrich-style reformers in Congress and I want them to clean house.
But guess what? I also have to accept reality. The reality of the situation is that there aren’t any real reformers in that race, on either side. So, as a politically-aware American voter, I have three choices: 1) I can hold my nose and support for the skunk who will at least use the system to benefit most of my political beliefs and pray that in other places, reformers will come; 2) I can vote against the skunk and for someone who will use the system to the detriment of most of my political beliefs; or 3) I can not support anyone at all.
You seem to suggest that I should take the third route. The problem with that is that if I do so, I leave the field to the likes of you and most of the folks who have posted comments in this thread. That’s just not going to happen. So you know what? I’ll choose to prefer the Devil who is working on my side and is at least susceptible to change his behavior because he actually needs the support I have to offer. What I won’t do is cast him into outer darkness and leave the field to some other Kos-certified maniac.
You know, when I wrote this post, I wasn’t especially a fan of Tom DeLay. I have said many times that I don’t like the way he plays the political game, though I understand that he plays it the way we’ve allowed it to be played. It would not hurt me at all to see him honestly lose an election to a candidate who beat him in a straight-up fight, without the official assistance from Ronnie Earle. And while I don’t think that Earle hoodwinked a Grand Jury, it’s not a big secret that he kept ramming the same case at the grand jury over and over until he got one that would hand down an indictment (on the very last day the GJ was empaneled, by the way).
My only point in my original post is that, like Martha Stewart, I and glad that DeLay managed to rise above what I believe to be an abuse of government power by a piqued official and that if I had to choose between DeLay and Earle, I’d choose Delay every time.
Now I’m thankful for the Daou link and I’m glad that you all have chosen to comment here – I like comments and want The Shack to be a place where folks can come and have lively and productive conversations.
Well, at least I got the lively part of that this week. I don’t know how productive the discussion has been, considering that most of the folks who left comments here, yourself included, jumped to several untrue conclusions that you would not have reached had you just read what I said. Instead, you saw the words “DeLay” and “happy” and reacted as if you had seen the words “baby-eating” and “hooray for”. Instead of kicking around some real ideas, I spent most of the week trying to unbunch the panties of complete strangers who had nothing better to do than to show up here and call me names or suggest that I’m a crook also. You wasted my time, your own time, and the time of my readers playing the Howard Dean game instead of sitting down like civilized folks and have an actual conversation.
If you want to know why conservatives like me have contempt for liberals in general, that’s one of the reasons.