Wow
The indictment of Tom Delay was not much of a surprise for me. The man's pretty crooked and it was only a matter of time before the trail of corruption and deceit finally caught up with him. And, understandably (and stupidly), the current GOP establishment is rushing to his aid.
This has made Hunter at Daily Kos kinda upset. All I can really say is ... damn ... he's ticked..
Welcome to the world of the politics of personal destruction, you tubthumping, chin-jutting, Bush humping gits. Welcome to the nasty and partisan world that Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, Michelle Malkin, Hugh Hewitt, Grover Norquist, Newt Gingrich, Tom DeLay, and a legion of insignificant lowest-rung toadies like yourselves nurtured into fruition daily with eager, grubby hands, and now look upon with dull-faced faux horror.
I know you hate me, and anyone else who dares disturb the thin strands of alternate reality in which George W. Bush is an intellectual giant, Saddam really was responsible for 9/11, the economy is getting better by the minute, and we capture the most very important members of al Qaeda on a weekly basis.
But here's some advice. You'd better start hating me more. This is the world you forged and, unfortunately for you, I'm beginning to take a fancy for it. Welcome to the politics of your own party, finally sprouting from the ground on which you planted the seeds and shat upon them.
A tad vulgar at times, but Hunter's point is well-taken. You can't create this entirely new set of rules in politics, as the Republicans did in the 1990s, and then when it starts to get used on them, feign innocence.
It's actually fairly remarkable, what's going on right now. What you are witnessing is the implosion of an entire political party right now. I'm not saying they'll lose Congress ... or even the presidency in 2008 (though I hope so), but the corruption and greed and deceit that runs rampant through some key leaders in the current GOP power structure will haunt them for years to come. This is a party that was poised to seize control of the American government for quite a while, but the missteps with regard to Iraq and Katrina, the continued sluggishness of the economy, the unpopularity of the GOP proposals for Social Security and other programs, and the ramifications of the potential criminal and definitely unethical activities of Delay, Bill Frist (investigation for selling stock just before it crashed) and Jack Abramoff will loom large.
Take notice ... this really could be the collapse of this version of the GOP.
This has made Hunter at Daily Kos kinda upset. All I can really say is ... damn ... he's ticked..
Welcome to the world of the politics of personal destruction, you tubthumping, chin-jutting, Bush humping gits. Welcome to the nasty and partisan world that Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, Michelle Malkin, Hugh Hewitt, Grover Norquist, Newt Gingrich, Tom DeLay, and a legion of insignificant lowest-rung toadies like yourselves nurtured into fruition daily with eager, grubby hands, and now look upon with dull-faced faux horror.
I know you hate me, and anyone else who dares disturb the thin strands of alternate reality in which George W. Bush is an intellectual giant, Saddam really was responsible for 9/11, the economy is getting better by the minute, and we capture the most very important members of al Qaeda on a weekly basis.
But here's some advice. You'd better start hating me more. This is the world you forged and, unfortunately for you, I'm beginning to take a fancy for it. Welcome to the politics of your own party, finally sprouting from the ground on which you planted the seeds and shat upon them.
A tad vulgar at times, but Hunter's point is well-taken. You can't create this entirely new set of rules in politics, as the Republicans did in the 1990s, and then when it starts to get used on them, feign innocence.
It's actually fairly remarkable, what's going on right now. What you are witnessing is the implosion of an entire political party right now. I'm not saying they'll lose Congress ... or even the presidency in 2008 (though I hope so), but the corruption and greed and deceit that runs rampant through some key leaders in the current GOP power structure will haunt them for years to come. This is a party that was poised to seize control of the American government for quite a while, but the missteps with regard to Iraq and Katrina, the continued sluggishness of the economy, the unpopularity of the GOP proposals for Social Security and other programs, and the ramifications of the potential criminal and definitely unethical activities of Delay, Bill Frist (investigation for selling stock just before it crashed) and Jack Abramoff will loom large.
Take notice ... this really could be the collapse of this version of the GOP.
posted by Jmac at 4:29 PM
7 Comments:
Right now, I'd say that Democrats have a decent shot at winning control of the Senate in 06, not much of a chance at picking up control of the House, and a fighting shot at the White House in 08, depending on who we nominate and who they nominate.
Please don't let it be Hilary. Please.
"You can't create this entirely new set of rules in politics, as the Republicans did in the 1990s, and then when it starts to get used on them, feign innocence".
But then neither can you complain when the new rules are put in, say that they are "politics of personal destruction", and then when you get good at using them yourself, "feign innocence." Hypocrisy arguments (in politics) usually go both ways.
That's a rather circular argument. It would only be hypocrisy if Democrats would 'feign innocence' if, say, Harry Reid was attacked along those personal lines and then he feigned innocence.
This more nasty version of the 'politics of personal destruction' was perfected by the Gingrich Republicans in the 1990s and implemented against the Clinton administration - typically on rather shaky and foolish grounds. It has started to swing back and bite some Republicans now (rightfully so in my book), and those who invented these cruel game are now saying 'don't attack me.'
If it swings back around and Democrats are investigated or attacked and they feign innocence, then we've got some potential hypocrisy, sure (and, knowing the political beast, I'm sure such a scenario will occur). But that hasn't happened yet.
If I kept hitting you in the face over and over again and you kept saying 'Jmac, that's no way to be' and then, out of frustration, you sock me in the mouth and I say 'gee wheez Xon, why are you being so mean to me' ... something wouldn't seem right, would it?
For the record, folks of both parties who break the rules should face the appropriate punishment, and folks from both parties should call out those who break the rules ... even if they're in their own parties. Sen. Joe Lieberman got a lot of slack from Democrats - and, ideology-wise, I'm not a huge fan of Lieberman - when he rightfully said it was pretty stupid of President Clinton to cheat on his wife with an intern.
If something's improper, it's improper no matter what party affiliation you've got.
I'm a big fan of analogies, but in this case there is an important difference between Democrats 'retaliating' and you hitting me out after I hit you over and over again. The Democrats aren't just socking the Repubs "out of frustration," they are employing it as a strategy just as surely as the Repubs were in the 1990s.
It is not just a visceral reaction to what Repubs are doing. It is an effort to bring down Repub leaders, just as the 'Gingrich Republicans' tried to bring down Clinton (and whoever else).
Now, if the Dems have switched strategies, then that's one thing. But that can be interpreted as "hypocrisy", especially if you make a big deal out of the Republican response to the strategy.
Once upon a time, (so goes the story), Repubs engaged in the 'politics of personal destruction' and the Dems stayed stayed above such juvenile tactics. Now, Dems are doing it too. And the Repubs are whining. Which does (I agree) make the Repubs hypocritical. But Democrat apologists shouldn't push that button too hard, or else they'll have to answer the question themselves about why Dems now think it's okay to engage in the same politics of personal destruction which they used to be 'too good' for.
(I find this entire story ridiculous, anyway. The Repubs didn't do anything new in the 1990s. Politics has always been nasty.)
To continue to add interesting caveats to this tale, it's also important to recognize - and I failed to do this, as well as the author at Daily Kos - that the circumstances of how DeLay and other high-ranking GOPers are falling are distinctly different from that which affected the Clinton administration.
That is, the Clinton administration was attacked, accused and investigated by partisans for partisan purposes. The moment the man was elected, the Republican power structure embarked on an eight-year crusade to bring him down through scandal since they couldn't do it at the polls (and Clinton, stupidly, after fighting off all of the bogus charges, went and fooled around with Monica Lewinsky).
The current Republican leadership, DeLay in particular, has been investigated by independent counsels and judges and grand juries. There has been no Congressional investigation (being controlled by Republicans, why would there be?). The indictment of DeLay, for example, is from a Texas D.A. who has indicted 15 politicians in his time for corruption, 12 of them Democrats.
So I'm not entirely sure how hypocritical it is for Democrats to point out the obvious - that Republicans are facing a wide swarth of ethical and legal problems brought upon by their own corruption and leveled at them by legitimate, non-partisan law enforcement officials. Republicans, however, who were responsible for every investigation in the witch-hunt that was Whitewater and Travelgate and all of the like, are now accusing Democrats of 'playing dirty.'
I just don't how dirty it is. If Democrats were accusing Tom DeLay of something he isn't and then launching their own witch-hunt against him, that would be one thing. But an independent district attorney indicting him and Democrats merely commenting on it (and, for the record, I haven't seen many - in fact, any - Democrats bring this to anyone's attention).
Politics are nasty. But they are wholly nastier today than they were, say, 25 years ago. Part of this is because of the 'politics of personal destruction' which emerged in the 1990s. Part of this is the suspicious post-Watergate/post-Vietnam world we live in. Part of this is because of the rise of the 24-hour news cycle. Part of this is a bloodthirsty electorate that has been steadily dumbed down.
It ain't all the Republicans' fault ... but they played a hand in it in my book.
You're spinning the Texas D.A. badly, though. He has tried on multiple occasions to indict DeLay, and this is the first time something stuck.
He is an outspoken democrat, though I don't hold that against him per se. Public officials can have political opinions and affiliations. But the "independent" nature of his indictments is not abundantly clear to me.
Furthermore, read the actual indictment. What exactly is DeLay being accused of? What conspiracy, exactly? It's a travesty this indictment was ever accepted by a grand jury.
Which brings me to my fourth point, which is that it's pretty easy to get indictments in this country. It's much harder to get convictions, and the very fact a man was indicted doesn't necessarily tell us much.
But I think you're spinning the Texas D.A. in your own way. :)
His job requires him to perform these investigations and the trail has led him to DeLay - and, as it should be noted, a host of other politicians from all sides of the political spectrum. Plus, let's keep in mind that it isn't like DeLay is a saint. Far from it ... he's the epitome of what a corrupt politician looks like. He's been reprimended for ethical violations three times by a Republican Congress. That's hardly partisan.
Granted, an indictment isn't a conviction and folks may get indicted 'all the time' ... but that doesn't exonerate DeLay from the charges (which, by the by, are a clear violation of the campaign finance laws ... you may dislike said laws, but they are in violation of them). But there was enough reason for two separate grand juries to indict him on three different counts, and his connections to folks like Jack Abramoff and his numerous reprimands for ethical violations make this an interesting backstory.
There is absolutely nothing partisan about Ronnie Earle's indictment of DeLay. You may disagree with the indictment ... and that's fine. But to suggest that Earle has had it out for DeLay since day one is completely misleading. I can possibly concede that Earle may - may - have something for politicians, but that's wholly different than having it out for Republicans or DeLay.
I just don't know why everything single action has to be partisan decision. I don't know why Earle's investigation is partisan. Again, it's one thing to disagree with the charges, but it's another thing to suggest it's politically motivated.
Same thing goes all the way around. Democrats who pointed the finger at the Bush administration for the federal government's failure in the Katrina response should be prepared to point that finger at the failures of Democratic-controlled state and local governments as well.
Everything isn't always a partisan attack. Sometimes people do their jobs to the best of their ability, and that's what I think Earle did. Whether or not he can convict DeLay is a wholly different issue. But those who suggest it's a partisan witchhunt are doing so are misleading people.
Post a Comment
<< Home