If the Dems had any power they'd be doing the exact same things.
Very true, but it doesn't make the situation with Delay any less funny.
You've got to admit that plenty of Dems laughed at Clinton when he got caught, shame the Republicans can't do the same thing. Trouble is, when you set yourself up as "God's party" as the Republicans have, its hard to accept when the leadership of the party is found to be all too human. Politics needs to get its sense of humour back.
Sir Lance-alot wrote:
If O.J. Simpson had been a Republican congressman, and then he went and did what he did, you asses would defending HIM.
I believe the correct grammar is YOUS ASSES would be defending him
Fence Sitting Moderate wrote:
My prediction is that the GOP's lawyers will dig up juicy dirt about Nancy Pelosi, Hilary Clinton, and other prominent Dems very soon and this whole so-called "case" will be swept under the rug.
I believe this was attempted for about eight consecutive years. Yes, there is enough corruption to go around, but to say the degree is always the same is laughable.
A) I am not a "youngster."
B) Yes, obviously Delay is not the only corrupt politician, but to take that attitude that "they are all equally corrupt" is BS. It's the same deal with the attitude that because many athletes dope, "they must ALL be dopers." Give me a break. I know it's easier to have a simplistic belief system in life, where there are no gray areas anywhere to be seen, but THAT is being childish and naive. Do we know what all other politicians have done in their lives? No. Have many been very corrupt? Yes. Are some acutally not corrupt? Of course some are not (sometimes just being rich and having connections is enough to get to power. Once in a great while being a great leader and person is enough, though that is rare). So where does that leave us? It leaves us with what we know: that Delay is one of the most corrupt politicians in memory, and he is getting his due. Sometime the people that deserve the attacks are actually the ones getting them.
C) you wrote:
" I choose to take care of myself and my loved ones rather than getting my shorts in a bunch fighting for "the little man". The paranoid and cynical will always survive! "
Firstly, that statement of yours explains why you have moved from the "fence" you claim to sit on, and way over to the right. The Democrats may not care nearly as much about the little guy as they claim, and some of their "caring" about them obviously has to do with getting votes from these "little guys", BUT....in the end, they still do way more for and care more about the "little guy" than the Republicans do. And this is one of the main reasons I support the Dems. The Republicans care mostly about the "not so little guys".....the top of the tax bracket, the power brokers in Corporate America, and so on. This gets them lots of $ from those groups, but for awhile, not enough votes(there are too many little guys in American to be ignored). But then the Repubs played the neat trick of adding to their base the Religious Right, by bashing gays and science(evolution, stem cell research, etc), and they were able to convince some of those "little guys" that they cared about them, and would protect them from gay marriage and stem cell research. Voila!! They got the votes they needed in the last few elections.
Secondly, the "paranoid and cynical" often DON'T survive. Delay's attitude towards politics and power could not be desribed any better than being "cynical", and he is already starting to not survive. And there are countless other examples of that occuring also. I think you need to re-examine your simplistic views on life.
Jim Mattox is a Bush hating liberal. There goes the conspiracy theory.
Sir Lance-alot wrote:
If you can't at least condemn Delay, than you wouldn't condemn any Republican no matter what he did. If O.J. Simpson had been a Republican congressman, and then he went and did what he did, you asses would defending HIM.
No. DeLay was indicted for conspiracy in connection with a potential violation of Texas state campaign finance laws. That is hardly the moral or legal equivalent to killing somebody.
Just ask Laura Bush or Teddy Kennedy.
I'll bet if the Ethics Committee investigated everyone in the House and Senate, 80% of them would be indicted.
They're all corrupt!!
dean moriarty wrote:
I'll bet if the Ethics Committee investigated everyone in the House and Senate, 80% of them would be indicted.
They're all corrupt!!
I love it.....when one of "your guys" gets nailed, your conclusion is that nearly all politicians are corrupt, and Delay is just being picked on. But when it was Clinton getting a bj, he deserved all the invesitigations and was evil incarnate, the worst of all politicians.
Its not that he got a BJ... Its that he lied to everyone about it on national TV!!! Sorry Clintonites , once you loose your integrety you will never get it back!!! I liked the man as pres but when you blatenly lie and get caught, well...
he didn't lie. starr just never defined what the word "is" meant.
also...
DeLay...
hard for me to take seriously a man whos name makes me want to open a bag of doritoes.
remember wrote:
Its not that he got a BJ... Its that he lied to everyone about it on national TV!!! Sorry Clintonites , once you loose your integrety you will never get it back!!! I liked the man as pres but when you blatenly lie and get caught, well...
Newt lied on National TV. Republicans didn't say a thing. Clinton lied to a grand jury, which is what got him impeached. Lying on National TV is something Republicans do just by opening their mouths in front of a camera.
How about "no one anticipated the levees would break", how about "yellow cake", or "we know where the weapons are", or "I promise to uphold the constitution of the United States"? All are lied told on National TV by Republicans. The big difference is, none were about a b*******, they were about a snow job.
Now I know it's not fair to lump all Republicans into one group. I figure there's three kinds of Republicans. Crooks (Delay, Cheney, Abramoff, etc), Hyprocrites (Gingrich, Bush, Frist), or idiots (people that voted for the above).
Which are you?
With all due respect, Keith, I see fourth and fifth groups. The fourth is those Republicans who are (relatively) honest and trustworthy, but whose fundamental world view is at odds with my own, such as John McCain. Then there are people who identify as Republicans but are shocked and horrified at what the party has become over the last 25 years, such as my own parents.
And then, to paraphrase the film "Bulworth", if you ask if the opposition party doesn't care about the needs of ordinary people, the response is "Isn't it obvious?"