Tom Delay and ethics - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

Joe Bauers · #1 11-18-2004, 11:34 AM

In today's Chicago Tribune (a newspaper, by the way, that has endorsed every Republican candidate for president for the past 100+ years), there was an editorial skewering Tom Delay and House Republicans for their revision of their own ethics rules. Three of Delay's associates are currently under indictment in Texas for corrupt dealings, and there is a fear that Delay may soon be indicted as well.

Heretofore, the Republican rules required the removal of any party leader from his leadership position if he were indicted for a felony that carried a penalty of 2 or more years imprisonment. Now, in a closed-door session and by secret vote, they have amended their own rules to allow such a person to continue in his leadership position while under indictment.

Delay, who goes by the nickname "The Hammer" for his heavy-handed ways, once observed: "There are two kinds of people in this country--loyal Americans and liberals."

So much for improving governmental ethics.

Joe B.

boneheaddoctor · #2 11-18-2004, 11:38 AM

This posted by a guy who believed Clinton commited no perjury..................

Joe Bauers · #3 11-18-2004, 11:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by boneheaddoctor

This posted by a guy who believed Clinton commited no perjury..................

I never, ever, said Clinton committed no perjury. Try your BS on someone else.

Joe B.

boneheaddoctor · #4 11-18-2004, 12:03 PM

Try to comment on the actions of Tom Dashil that the dems always overlooked .

I want to see the dems apply the same standards to themselves they apply to the republicans....when they do then we can talk.

GermanStar · #5 11-18-2004, 12:05 PM

Why not just stick to the topic? You can always start another thread if you want to talk about Clinton or Daschle...

Joe Bauers · #6 11-18-2004, 12:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GermanStar

Why not just stick to the topic? You can always start another thread if you want to talk about Clinton or Daschle...

I agree, GermanStar. But I don't think sticking to the topic is his forte, if you get my drift.

Joe B.

boneheaddoctor · #7 11-18-2004, 12:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GermanStar

Why not just stick to the topic? You can always start another thread if you want to talk about Clinton or Daschle...

Why doesn't he answer the question.....................

The Dems are far more quilty of this than the republicans.....and he is ignoring that fact.

Joe Bauers · #8 11-18-2004, 12:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by boneheaddoctor

Try to comment on the actions of Tom Dashil that the dems always overlooked .

I want to see the dems apply the same standards to themselves they apply to the republicans....when they do then we can talk.

Don't need to talk with you. You are no more enlightened as the boneheaddoctor than you were as VirginiaDude.

Joe B.

boneheaddoctor · #9 11-18-2004, 12:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joe Bauers

Don't need to talk with you. You are no more enlightened as the boneheaddoctor than you were as VirginiaDude.

Joe B.

At least I am no brainwashed follower of the DNC........I can see things for what they are, unlike you who is bind to the actions of your chosen party.

Typical Dem response...... they are perfect and the republicans do no right. And when they have nothing to complain about you create things, Like Dan Rather did.

You never called Kerry to task on his lies and misdeads......or Tom Dashil....

or any democrat for that matter.

When you can do that...then maybe I will give what you say a little credibility.

I can critisize my party when they make a mistake, they are human, not infallible, you refuse to acknowledge your party made a lot of mistakes.

JimSmith · #10 11-18-2004, 02:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by boneheaddoctor

This posted by a guy who believed Clinton commited no perjury..................

I believe you have Joe confused with me. As far as I know, neither of us has ever changed our screen names.

I never said Clinton did not commit perjury either, but I did say the question of whether or not he was having sex with Monica Lewinski was asked in the context of a grand jury investigation gone awry - the subject of the investigation was Whitewater, not blowjobs, dirty dresses or sex in the oval office. Even the judge said the line of questioning was not pertinent to the case. So, the consequence of Clinton's perjury, committed because of political agendas of the opposition party at the time and not because of a complaint by Ms. Lewinski that he refused to pay to have her dress laundered or any other short coming on the part of President Clinton, affected no one. Because it was no one's business. Unless, of course, you are unable to mind your own business, and are obsessed with the Presidential Erection.

But, in the case of Tom Delay, there is a pattern of abuse of power, and as Kirk has noted, subversive activities to launder corporate politcal donations to help Republicans get elected in Texas. That is not Tom Delay getting a blow job from a woman, a man, or himself, which would be no one's business. But violating a federal or State law, that is of interest to all of us who want to ensure the country is ruled by law, not by those who would ignore the law.

I know you have a great deal of difficulty seeing that Clinton's perjury is about as menial as perjury can get, and in the grand scheme of things, he allowed himself to be painted into a corner where his judgement failed him. It is apparent that all politicians are human and have lapses of judgement. Clinton's were not failures that endangered the national security, interfered with his ability to continue to carry out the duties of President, or were in any way detrimental to any Americans other than those in his family. Nothing he did was illegal, up to the point of being cornered by Kenneth Starr and asked a question having nothing to do with the purpose of Kenneth Starr's investigation of Whitewater, which in and of itself was a politically motivated witch hunt.

But, the fact that you cannot get over Clinton's effort to spare his wife and daughter the embarrassment of confessing his sins to Kenneth Starr on the stand in a grand jury investigation of some other allegations, is clear evidence your judgement is clouded by other issues. You may hate Clinton for some other reason having to do with his policies that might be valid if the actions were contrary to your judgement of what would have been right. But I have surmised from your persistent, unsupported declarations about Clinton's perjury that you merely hate him because he is a Democrat. You can do that, it is within the range of options you have, just don't accuse others of being run by the DNC when it is so apparent that your depth of thought on these subjects goes no further than swallowing the RNC propaganda fed to you from the radio talk show blow hards and Fox News tools of the RNC. Jim

boneheaddoctor · #11 11-18-2004, 03:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JimSmith

I believe you have Joe confused with me. As far as I know, neither of us has ever changed our screen names.

I never said Clinton did not commit perjury either, but I did say the question of whether or not he was having sex with Monica Lewinski was asked in the context of a grand jury investigation gone awry - the subject of the investigation was Whitewater, not blowjobs, dirty dresses or sex in the oval office. Even the judge said the line of questioning was not pertinent to the case. So, the consequence of Clinton's perjury, committed because of political agendas of the opposition party at the time and not because of a complaint by Ms. Lewinski that he refused to pay to have her dress laundered or any other short coming on the part of President Clinton, affected no one. Because it was no one's business. Unless, of course, you are unable to mind your own business, and are obsessed with the Presidential Erection.

But, in the case of Tom Delay, there is a pattern of abuse of power, and as Kirk has noted, subversive activities to launder corporate politcal donations to help Republicans get elected in Texas. That is not Tom Delay getting a blow job from a woman, a man, or himself, which would be no one's business. But violating a federal or State law, that is of interest to all of us who want to ensure the country is ruled by law, not by those who would ignore the law.

I know you have a great deal of difficulty seeing that Clinton's perjury is about as menial as perjury can get, and in the grand scheme of things, he allowed himself to be painted into a corner where his judgement failed him. It is apparent that all politicians are human and have lapses of judgement. Clinton's were not failures that endangered the national security, interfered with his ability to continue to carry out the duties of President, or were in any way detrimental to any Americans other than those in his family. Nothing he did was illegal, up to the point of being cornered by Kenneth Starr and asked a question having nothing to do with the purpose of Kenneth Starr's investigation of Whitewater, which in and of itself was a politically motivated witch hunt.

But, the fact that you cannot get over Clinton's effort to spare his wife and daughter the embarrassment of confessing his sins to Kenneth Starr on the stand in a grand jury investigation of some other allegations, is clear evidence your judgement is clouded by other issues. You may hate Clinton for some other reason having to do with his policies that might be valid if the actions were contrary to your judgement of what would have been right. But I have surmised from your persistent, unsupported declarations about Clinton's perjury that you merely hate him because he is a Democrat. You can do that, it is within the range of options you have, just don't accuse others of being run by the DNC when it is so apparent that your depth of thought on these subjects goes no further than swallowing the RNC propaganda fed to you from the radio talk show blow hards and Fox News tools of the RNC. Jim

Jim perjury oin the stand is a criminal offense......period. Anyone else would have extra jail time for "wanting to spare their wife and kids" . I hate Clintons because they think they are above everyone else. I also have worked in close proximity to them doing my job and So has my boss who worked IN the White house.

I know things about them they never want public.

Every statement I made is very clearly part of the public record. And I see enough of the News from an insiders perspective I can make many of those assertions.

Do you actually believe Dan Rather is unbiased? And didn't have an ax to grind.

And when someone keeps repeating the same UNSUBSTANTIATED comments made by the DNC such as were so very persistant during the election I can call them on it because in many of those cases ample proof was shown to dispell them.

Such as the persistant insistance Sadam had no links to terrorism. The money trail from Sadam to the terrorists families has be disclosed and substantiated. And yet people insist Iraq was unjustified and Illegal.

The Left refuses to acknowledge the fact that there was numerous repeated material breaches of the cease fire agreement made by Sadam.

Keep in mind what would happen in Korea if one side violated their part. That war is not over, its still in a cease fire situation.

boneheaddoctor · #12 11-18-2004, 03:31 PM

No time did I say Ton Delay was a saint. I am questioning their motivations.

Jorn · #13 11-18-2004, 03:31 PM

Don't you guys have to work?

boneheaddoctor · #14 11-18-2004, 03:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jorn

Don't you guys have to work?

no, none of us obviously have anything better to do.

KirkVining · #15 11-18-2004, 03:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jorn

Don't you guys have to work?

Actually, I'm working while I do this. The nice part about owning the business is you don't have to worry about the boss looking over your shoulder. If I caught anyone working for me doing it, I'd fire em.