I have always been a Tom DeLay fan.
I have always regarded him as a decent, principled man who was one of the most effective legislators of all time. Targeted in a vicious abuse of the judicial system by a blatantly partisan hack allied with the Main Stream Media, DeLay chose not to sit for re-election after it was made clear to him that the Bush Administration felt it would hurt the party as a whole...so DeLay took a bullet.
As we've seen, the laugh is on Dubbya now that DeLay's firm hand on the House is missing.
Now, Delay could be headed back to the House, if an appeals court lets stand a ruling by a federal judge last week that his name must stay on November's ballot.
The Hammer is still awaiting a final verdict on the bogus charges of `money laundering', a trial in which most experts who have followed it say DeLay is certain to be acquitted of all charges.
According to Time, a source close to the ex-Congressman said that DeLay is planning an aggressive campaign to retake the House seat if the federal judge's verdict stands.
He'd be likely to win, too. His opponent is democratic ex-Congressman Nick Lampson, who's not particularly popular in that part of Texas, to say the least.
The Hammer may be headed back to the House...and that would be a good thing!
even though rove is considered the evil genius, i have contention with some of the so-called "decisions" that have been made.
ReplyDeleteas i consider myself conservative,
as opposed to being republican, i also would like to see delay back in deecee.
Hi Louie..I agree with you. DeLay is a much needed presence.
ReplyDeleteHi Nazar;
I concentrate on the War on Jihad because I consider it to be the primary issue of our times. Almost all of my coverage of domestic politics is seen through that particular prism. If I like Tom DeLay, a big reason is his record on the War on Jihad and Israel..not the fact that he happens to be a Republican.
Like Louie, I'm more of a principles guy, regardless of whether somebody has a small `r' or a small `d' after their name.
Let's look calmly at what you said. Some of it I agree with..a lot of it I don't.
To start with, you make a number of assertions about DeLay being corrupt. I'd like specifics, if you don't mind. I know of no instance where DeLay has been found guilty of corruption.Corruption has a very specific meaning..as does perjury AND obstruction of justice.(The felonies Clinton was actually convicted of)
As for DeLay's redistricting laws, the SCOTUS recently found them almost entirely legal and proper.
What the US government is based on is a SEPERATION OF POWERS, not a `fragmented government'. A lot of what you call the Right Wing Agenda is a direct reaction to the ursurpation of those powers, noticibly by the judiciary. As for large swaths of the Democratic party being aggressively anti-Christian, pro gun control and pro unlimited abortion, whatever views we might have on these issues, I think it's pretty plain to any unprejudiced observer that this is simply a fact, IMO. We can certainly agree to disagree on certain aspects of these issues, but I think the mainstream stance of the two parties is pretty clear. And as such, DeLayhas as much right to campaign against the Democratic party's ideas as Democrats have to vilify `the vast right wing conspiracy'.
Which brings us to Mr. Bill. You are within your rights to consider him a great president. I don't. Here's some food for thought, perhaps...
Read up on Charley Tri, John Hwang and the Riyadi family,their connections to Communist China and their financing of the Clinton campaigns. Clinton would never have been president if it were not for a $1.5 million dollar loan the Riyadi's gave Clinton after he lost the New Hampshire primary in `92. And that was by no means all he received from them. After Clinton was in the White House, one of his first acts was to decalssify and OK all kinds of military hardware and technology for shipment to Communist China, funnelled through democratic donor Loral, especially in the field of supercomputers used for military applications, like missile guidance. The Chinese military closed the technology gap with the US by almost 20 years during Clinton's terms in office. Connect the dots...Read 'Year of the Rat' by Edward Timperlake and Bill Gertz's book `Betrayal' for a little insight into this subject.
Mr. Bill also had a disasterous effect on North Korea and on the Middle East.
He sent George Stepanopoulos and a war chest full of cash to get Israeli Prime Minister Rabin elected, and was so blatant about it that the Israelis actually revamped their election campain laws! Clinton is singlehandedly responsible for pressuring Israel to empower his favorite terrorist, Yasir Arafat and bring him back from exile in Tunis and allow him to set up a terrorist enclave right next to Israel via the Oslo Accords.
Clinton had Arafat to the White House more than any other foreign leader..in spite of having full knowledge of the fact that a US ambassador was tortured to death in Lebanon on Arafat's direct orders.
Clinton's failures to deal with al Qaeda and Osama bin-Laden are fairly well known as well, especially the direct intervention of Assistant Attorney General Jamie Gorelick on orders from the Clinton White House to prevent US military intel group Able/Danger from sharing intelligence with other US intelligence agencies they had uncovered on Mohammed Atta and the other 9/11 hijackers prior to the attacks. As for bin-Laden, the Sudan actusally had him in custody and were readty to turn him over to the US...except that Clinton decided not to accept him.
A lot of Clinton's decisions were obviously motivated by quid pro quo and financial gain. The Clinton library recieved seven figure `gifts' from both the Saudis and the UAE, and Mr. Bill has long made a nice dollar as a lecturer in places like Dubai's government funded Zayed Center, the source of some of the most anti-Semitic and anti-American propaganda on the planet. J O S H U A P U N D I T: Hillary Clinton 'unaware' of Bill's Dubai ties; but her senatorial financial disclosure says different!
As I think you also may know, Mr. Bill hired himself out as a `consultant' to advise the UAE on how to successfully lobby congress to take over management of our ports.
Of course, he's by no means alone in that. Ex-Senator Bob Dole and Neil Bush, the preident's brother are two other recepients of the Arab's largesse. Do a search on this blog for `Dubai' for some goo-ood readin'..
As for the Clinton `prosperity', that was a function of the dot.com boom, which largely dissapated into thin air and which he had little or nothing to do with, and Clinton's little known refinancing of our national debt. What Mr.Bill did was to turn longterm fixed obligations of the government into short term high risk obligations...reaping a benefit in lower interest rates and a short term `deficit reduction' but sacrificing long term security, since the obligations would come due after he was safely out of office. Only the drastic (and lucky!) lowering of interest rates after 2000 saved the US from a major financial crisis that would have made the S&L scandal look like a mere blip on the radar.
Clinton has mostly gotten a pass from the media and his fellow Americans. I think history will provide some needed clarity to what actually transpired during his eight years in the White House.
As always, Nazar, your comments lead to some stimulating discussions! And I LOVE that!
Regards,
FF
That was a pretty nice compliment there at the end, Nazar. Thanks..I'll certainly try to live up to it.
ReplyDeleteI like DeLay because of his stand on the War against Jihad and I don't like the fact that I feel he was targeted unfairly.
I do agree with you that partisan politics are WAY over the edge. I don't feel DeLay is any more guilty of this than say, Harry Reid, Howard Dean or Nancy Pelosi.
As far as party discipline goes, it's a game both sides play.and are able to do so because of the spectre of the national committee withholding funds from the next campaign. That's EXACTLY what's happening to Joe Lieberman in CT, a mostly liberal Senator..for the simple reason that he refused to toe the party line on Iraq.Sad, really.
As I've said before, partisan politics used to stop at the water's edge when we were at war. Not now.
We'll probably never agree on Clinton, but read the books I linked to if you like and see if your opinion changes at all.
Regards,
FF
Exhibit#2: Gerrymandering.
ReplyDeletewell, i don't know much about that.
in 1990, both chambers of the texas house had a quorum of democrats, add to that a dem. gov., lt. gov., and a dem. sec. of state.
the redistriting plan that year was crammed down the throat of (r) as it had been in all years previous.
fast forward to 2000.
that gentle breeze you just felt...........the winds of change.
a rep. gov., lt. gov., sec. of state, and (r) majorites in both chambers of the texas state legis. even with those (d) districting shennanigans 10 years earlier the (r) held a 17-14 advantage in the U.S. House delegation from texas.
not reflective of the current condition/situation in present day texas.
currently the only ranking (d) is the state comptroller.
the only reason the redistricting was forced through is because that is how texas politics is done.
you don't think so.
ask LBJ.
he had a federal judge killed to get re-districting through.
i digress.
the (d) from the texas house ran across the border to okla. to prevent a quorum the first year.
the (d) from the texas state senate ran to new mexico the following year.
yeah, you're right delay forced the issue.
nothing that wasn't done before.
as in, gerrymandering was not invented in 2000.
as for redistricting standing up, the feds may not like it, activist judges and all, due to the fact that all nine(9) judges on the texas supreme court are all rep.
did i mention that in 1990 all nine judges were dem???????
and in texas the judges run/re-run for election just like the rest of the politicos. the gov. can only appoint a replacement in the event of an aborted term.
Gerrymandering?????
like i said, don't know much about that.
as for bill, don't know much about that either.
whoever the pres. was in 1994 paid to have two light water reactors built in NK, yeah it was a coalition, we all know what coalition means, the USA.
one unit cost $14 billion.
one unit cost $16 billion.
its been twelve years now.
the US taxpayers should be seeing some political return on their investment with the dear leader.
wonder how that's gonna work out?
whether he'll live up his part of the bargain.
like i said, don't know much about bill either.
Nazar -- take it from a Texasn who lives n CD22 -- the districts down here were gerrymandered for decades in favor of Democrats. How else do you explain that the GOP would get nearly 60% of the vote but only 40% of the seats in an election in which they won EVERY SINGLE STATEWIDE OFFICE?
ReplyDeleteDeLay's "gerrymander" saw the Gop get around 60% of the vote and win about 60% of the seats in Congress. How is that an evil, unethical, partisan gerrymander? Seems to me that it much more accurately represents the will of the people.
Hiya Greg,
ReplyDeleteNice to have you drop by..pull up a chair and help yourself to a cold one.
And the rest of you, take a peek at Greg's site, Rhymes With Right....it's a good one.