Tom Delay and ethics - Page 5 - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

boneheaddoctor · #61 11-18-2004, 04:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joe Bauers

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Well said. This guy's idea of fairness is to say that I am "warped" and in need of therapy, yet he shrieks whenever anyone says anything disparaging about his beloved GOP.

I appreciate all those who contributed to the thread I started, which was about Tom Delay and the Republican rule change that would allow him to continue in his leadership position, even if indicted.

By the way--I have not changed my identity on this forum. I used to go by Joseph Bauers, but when they changed to their new format, it would not recognize that. I then went to Joe Bauers.

It is generally understood that boneheaddoctor is VirginiaDude in disguise. As VD, he was once canned for his inflammatory attacks.

Joe B.

Yes buy a moderator that allowed far worse from the liberals.............

thats no secret. I did or said Nothing a lot of others were noit saying. But then its the left that makes the jabs then cry foul when they get the same back.

Why do you think the OD was closed and he is no longer moderating it.

He turned it into the Bash the right forum. Just like its becoming again rapidly due to imlamitory posts directed at the right.

Joe Bauers · #62 11-18-2004, 04:38 PM

Here's a novel idea. Since I started a thread about Tom Delay and corruption, and since you wanted, instantly, to turn it into a bash Tom Daschle thread instead, why don't you try this: START YOUR OWN THREAD.

And all those who eagerly want to get on the bash Daschle bandwagon can join you.

My thread is about a politician currently in office; Daschle is currently unemployed.

Joe B.

Honus · #63 11-18-2004, 04:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by boneheaddoctor

...Why do you think the OD was closed and he is no longer moderating it...

I finally figured it out, VD/boneheaddoctor is really Tom Delay. You mess with him and you'll wish you didn't. Very powerful man.

KirkVining · #64 11-18-2004, 04:59 PM

Another thread that needs to be closed. Sad, because it is an issue that needs to be discussed, by rational people. Joe, you should delete it and start it over again.

#65 11-18-2004, 05:01 PM

Or people could just stop fagging up the thread

Honus · #66 11-18-2004, 05:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KirkVining

Another thread that needs to be closed. Sad, because it is an issue that needs to be discussed, by rational people. Joe, you should delete it and start it over again.

Was it something I said? You don't take Va Dude seriously, do you? He's probably the funniest guy on this forum. Let it go, man. I will quit ragging on VD if others will promise to do the same. Just ignore him.

Botnst · #67 11-18-2004, 05:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Botnst

Wow, a crooked politician.

Politicians I'd trust:
1.
2.
3.

I wouldn't trust the rest.

Like he said.

KirkVining · #68 11-18-2004, 05:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dculkin

Was it something I said? You don't take Va Dude seriously, do you? He's probably the funniest guy on this forum. Let it go, man. I will quit ragging on VD if others will promise to do the same. Just ignore him.

It would be nice if we just quit ragging on each other. The minute we do, the discussion of the issue stops, the thread gets derailed, and what should be a pleasant experience becomes unpleasant. If we police ourselves a little, things will not degenerate. Perhaps I can show my vision by quoting something I posted on another related forum, in response to a question asked on the fate of the other forums now that this forum has been re-opened:

"Well, if I was going to look at it as a businessman, I would look at in terms of needs of the customers being met. We seemed to have two classes of Mercedes Benz owners, those that want a no-holds barred environment, which isn't surprising because Mercedes owners are an upscale group so a lot of them are going to be like yours truly,Northern college educated guys who went to school during the 60s and 70s and are ok with the expression of radical ideas or if conservative, are ok with defending conservative ideas the way a starving dog defends a bone. Then we have the other other set, southerners who attended southern schools that did not share as much in radicalism of the 60s and 70s, except for getting laid a lot and smoking a lot of weed, becoming a more genteel class where decorum is valued more than mixing it up, a class where I and others like me are treated with the southern tradition that I am a welcome guest, until I speak of politics or religion, in which case they will kill me, and the only remaining argument would be whether it is better to use a horse or a pickup truck to hang a Yankee, or whether they should just kick me off a short stool, or if perhaps mercy should be shown and only a savage beating is in order.

So I think benzworld.org will survive as a place where people can swear at each other, advocate mass murder of either the wealthy or the poor or another poster, while this forum will maintain its Southern charm, while the Shop will be a place where we all attempt to compromise somehow with each others cultural and political shortcomings, and whether the moderator can keep the southern desire to find a short stool in check as it does the same with the Northern desire to form Bolshevik firing squads for those who hold opinions usually found below the Mason Dixon line. In the end it should all work out for everybody. Now, where did I put that rifle.......... Botsnst, what are you doing with that stool? And whats with the rope?"

http://www.benzforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3583&start=0
********************

That's what this place should be, a place where all ideas are welcome and freely discussed. If you want to flame, go to benzworld.org. If you want to be genteel, go to benzforum.com.

Jason Beal · #69 11-19-2004, 03:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by boneheaddoctor

And your forte is making stupid inflamitory comments about the party YOU personally don't like, and get all touchy when you don't want to acknowledge your party wrote the book on dishonesty.

LOL, you still are off topic and avoiding the subject though....

boneheaddoctor · #70 11-19-2004, 08:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joe Bauers

Here's a novel idea. Since I started a thread about Tom Delay and corruption, and since you wanted, instantly, to turn it into a bash Tom Daschle thread instead, why don't you try this: START YOUR OWN THREAD.

And all those who eagerly want to get on the bash Daschle bandwagon can join you.

My thread is about a politician currently in office; Daschle is currently unemployed.

Joe B.

How about you stuffing it since I have the same right to answer your dumb post as you have to make it in the first place................

boneheaddoctor · #71 11-19-2004, 08:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jason Beal

LOL, you still are off topic and avoiding the subject though....

so...your post if off topic too, wheres the difference?

boneheaddoctor · #72 11-19-2004, 08:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KirkVining

Another thread that needs to be closed. Sad, because it is an issue that needs to be discussed, by rational people. Joe, you should delete it and start it over again.

How about you democrats come to terms withthe fact you lost the election and stop making it you life goal to attack the right......

What a novel concept ........liberals being civil........nope its never going to happen.

boneheaddoctor · #73 11-19-2004, 09:38 AM

DeLay Complaint Said to Be ExaggeratedComplaint Against DeLay Was Filled With Exaggerations, House Ethics Committee Leaders Say
House Majority Leader Rep. Tom DeLay, R-Texas, walks to his car as he leaves the White House after a Congressional Leadership breakfast with President Bush Wednesday, Nov. 17, 2004. Moving to protect Majority Leader Tom DeLay, House Republicans want to change party rules to ensure that DeLay retains his post if a Texas grand jury indicts him as it did with three of his political associates. (AP Photo/Charles Dharapak)
The Associated Press

WASHINGTON Nov 19, 2004 — House ethics committee leaders say the complaint that led to a rebuke of Republican leader Tom DeLay in October was filled with exaggerations. They warned lawmakers of possible discipline if it happens again.

The complaint against DeLay by Rep. Chris Bell, D-Texas, violated a committee rule barring use of "innuendo, speculative assertions or conclusory statements," ethics Chairman Joel Hefley and senior Democrat Alan Mollohan wrote Bell.

Hefley, of Colorado, and Mollohan, of West Virginia, also used the four-page letter to place all House members on notice that future use of exaggerations and innuendoes could result in dismissal of the complaint in addition to disciplinary action.

The letter to Bell was not a disciplinary action.

$388B Spending Bill May Face Votes Soon
The Note: Solid As The Rock
Democrats Vie for Party Chair
Bell lost in a primary earlier this year because of a redistricting plan engineered by DeLay, a fellow Texan.

A freshman, Bell said he has "grave concerns that this is going to intimidate other members from coming forward to file meritorious complaints in the future. We need to work to open the ethics process up, not clamp it down. This is further evidence that the ethics process in the House is broken and needs to be fixed."

Bell's complaint was not dismissed, the letter said, because it contained allegations against DeLay that warranted consideration; and because the committee had not previously rejected any complaint for violations of the rule against innuendo and speculation.

The committee concluded in October that DeLay appeared to link political donations to a legislative favor and improperly persuaded federal aviation authorities to intervene in a Texas political dispute.

Hefley and Mollohan wrote Bell, "Indeed, it appears there is no purpose for including excessive or inflammatory language or exaggerated charges in a complaint except in an attempt to attract publicity and hence, a political advantage."

DeLay spokeswoman Shannon Flaherty said the letter "demonstrates the contempt and reckless disregard Chris Bell has shown for the Ethics Committee and its members by knowingly violating the rules of the House to advance his and his party leadership's political agenda of personal destruction."

The letter said the most serious exaggeration was Bell's contention that DeLay violated a bribery law "by soliciting campaign contributions" from a Kansas corporation, Westar Energy, in return for legislative assistance on an energy bill.

"There can hardly be a more serious charge against a public official than that he or she solicited a bribe," the committee letter said. It added that DeLay's actions "did not come even close to supporting this extremely serious claim."

The committee found in October that DeLay "created an appearance" of favoritism when he mingled at a 2003 golf outing with Westar executives just days after they contributed to a political organization associated with DeLay.

Bell's complaint also asserted:

The majority leader "engaged in a concerted and relentless effort to use the official resources of office" for "blatantly partisan political activities."

The Hefley-Mollohan letter said this broad allegation was not supported by the facts.

DeLay dispensed special favors to Westar.

The committee said the Bell complaint cited no action taken by DeLay for Westar. The committee findings in the DeLay case did say that Westar was seeking help with legislation at the time of the golf outing.

DeLay was solely responsible for federal aviation authorities tracking down an airplane in an effort to locate Democratic lawmakers fleeing the state. The legislators left Texas in an effort to prevent state Republican legislators from passing DeLay's redistricting plan.

The letter said it was a misstatement to attribute actions of federal officials solely to DeLay, when the Texas Department of Public Safety also contacted federal aviation authorities.

DeLay contacted the FBI in the effort to locate the Texas lawmakers.

The letter said there is no indication that DeLay called the FBI.

In another development, the committee decided to take no action against Rep. Karen McCarthy, D-Mo., after finding that she misused campaign funds for a trip to the Grammy Awards and refused to repay the money.

"I'm pleased the committee recommended no action, as I know I did nothing wrong," McCarthy said in a statement.

McCarthy announced her retirement last year following allegations, first reported by The Associated Press, that she improperly used her campaign and people on her House staff for personal benefit.

Associated Press writers Suzanne Gamboa and Libby Quaid contributed to this story.

Copyright 2004 The Associated Press.

Old300D · #74 11-19-2004, 10:38 AM

Quote:

WASHINGTON Nov 19, 2004 — House ethics committee leaders say the complaint that led to a rebuke of Republican leader Tom DeLay in October was filled with exaggerations. They warned lawmakers of possible discipline if it happens again.

The complaint against DeLay by Rep. Chris Bell, D-Texas, violated a committee rule barring use of "innuendo, speculative assertions or conclusory statements," ethics Chairman Joel Hefley and senior Democrat Alan Mollohan wrote Bell.

Hefley, of Colorado, and Mollohan, of West Virginia, also used the four-page letter to place all House members on notice that future use of exaggerations and innuendoes could result in dismissal of the complaint in addition to disciplinary action.

The letter to Bell was not a disciplinary action.

Lol! The House Ethics committee says the complaint is exaggerated. So what? The issue is the "procedure" change. It's telling the first action of this lame duck congress is to lower their ethical standards. The timing and target is obvious no matter how much DeLay denies it. Once DeLay is indicted (if Texas republicans fail to derail the prosecutor), the House leadership will simply claim the indictment is politically motivated so DeLay can continue as majority leader, despite the distractions of legal defense.

boneheaddoctor · #75 11-19-2004, 10:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Old300D

Lol! The House Ethics committee says the complaint is exaggerated. So what? The issue is the "procedure" change. It's telling the first action of this lame duck congress is to lower their ethical standards. The timing and target is obvious no matter how much DeLay denies it. Once DeLay is indicted (if Texas republicans fail to derail the prosecutor), the House leadership will simply claim the indictment is politically motivated so DeLay can continue as majority leader, despite the distractions of legal defense.

Its purely politicly motivated.....Dems having to bash republicans.... notice the fact dems never raised much stink about their own peoples misconduct.

Besides........the man is innocent until proven guilty.