• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

DeLay in trouble again...

I think this bears repeating.

"As soon as a Republican became Speaker of the House in 1994, the Democrats immediately formed a 'hit squad', headed by David Bonior (D) MI. They bombarded the Speaker with an uninterrupted stream accusations of ethics violations until he realized that he could no longer be effective, and so, he resigned. The Democrats then proceeded to brutalize each of his successors right on up to Tom DeLay, whom they are continuing to savage.

Think about this for a moment. Beginning with 1994, that was the mid-term election of Clinton's first term, and in three successive elections 1996, 1998, and 2000, the Democrats lost control of the House of Representatives (which they had controlled for forty some years), the Senate, and the White House. In 2002 the Democrats lost seats in both the House and the Senate; in 2004, they lost more seats in both the House and the Senate, and a Republican was re-elected to the White House. These are facts.

With absolutely nothing left to lose, what else can the Democrats do in their effort to recover, except try to soil the Republicans by any and every means available. What they fail to realize is that it's precisely this kind of conduct, together with policies that do not resound favorably with the electorate, that is leading them down the road to irrelevance.

Their current role as obstructionists doesn't help them at all."
 
Bad strawman. We're talking about Delay here, not democrats.
 
shuamort said:
Bad strawman. We're talking about Delay here, not democrats.
Click to expand...
No strawman at all. Actually, we're talking about the man who now happens to be leading a ten year long parade. He is simply being treated to the same "marching music" as his predecessors.

And while we're at it, the Dem attack dogs managed to knock off the Senate Majority Leader a short while back -- over an off the cuff crack at a retirement party, as I recall.

The Dems and their media apologists deserve a lot of credit. If they can't beat their opponents at the polls, they struggle to assassinate their characters. At this, they are experts.
 
Fantasea said:
No strawman at all. Actually, we're talking about the man who now happens to be leading a ten year long parade. He is simply being treated to the same "marching music" as his predecessors.

And while we're at it, the Dem attack dogs managed to knock off the Senate Majority Leader a short while back -- over an off the cuff crack at a retirement party, as I recall.

The Dems and their media apologists deserve a lot of credit. If they can't beat their opponents at the polls, they struggle to assassinate their characters. At this, they are experts.
Click to expand...
And Clinton was impeached over denying he had sex with Monica Lewinsky. If you can't see it goes both ways, you need to pay more attention.
 
shuamort said:
Here's a link to Delay's mugshot.
Click to expand...


LOL, they actually served him with a warrant, no......this isn't political at all is it?:rofl

Gee, maybe they should have had Clinton hauled in, finger printed, and had his mug shot taken. LOL, such petty actions will only serve to backfire, it's not as if he is a dangerous criminal, these are white collar crimes, and this is far reaching behavior.:roll:
 
It's quite amazing how much Clinton's name is mentioned here, in this thread about Delay. Is that how y'all have decided to back your man? Something like Delay is not as much of a scumbag as Clinton? Clinton lied so it's no big deal if our guy does too?

This thread will be as useless as t*ts on a bull if you guys don't pick it up and start talking about the real issues here. Is your man inocent or guilty because of HIS actions or do you stand firm that it was Clinton's blow job that made him do illegal things?

Shesh.
 
Middleground said:
It's quite amazing how much Clinton's name is mentioned here, in this thread about Delay. Is that how y'all have decided to back your man? Something like Delay is not as much of a scumbag as Clinton? Clinton lied so it's no big deal if our guy does too?

This thread will be as useless as t*ts on a bull if you guys don't pick it up and start talking about the real issues here. Is your man inocent or guilty because of HIS actions or do you stand firm that it was Clinton's blow job that made him do illegal things?

Shesh.
Click to expand...

We know Clinton was guilty, the jury is still out on Delay......I mean, you are still innocent until proven guilty, are you not?:confused:

I used Clinton as an example because it was relevant, he was never issued a warrant, finger printed, or had his mug shot taken. It's called respect for a man who has yet to be proven guilty of anything, and this was dirty pool, of course Delay was going to show up to answer these charges.

I don't even like the guy, he has always rubbed me the wrong way, but I call em as I see em.
 
Last edited:
Maybe I am confused here but I thought Delay was issued a warrant from his home state of Texas which by the way leans to the right politically. It was a grand jury that decided they had enough evidence to go after him. I have yet to see any evidence that this is the work of Democrats. Im not naive enough to think that the Dems aren't loving this but I see no reason to think that they are behind it. After hearing about the "criminalization of politics" all week on fox I am just beside myself. I mean if a guy is breaking the law shouldn't they go after him? And if it is more widespread than just DeLay, which I am sure that it is on both sides of the isle, I say go after them all.
 
Middleground said:
It's quite amazing how much Clinton's name is mentioned here, in this thread about Delay. Is that how y'all have decided to back your man? Something like Delay is not as much of a scumbag as Clinton? Clinton lied so it's no big deal if our guy does too?

This thread will be as useless as t*ts on a bull if you guys don't pick it up and start talking about the real issues here. Is your man inocent or guilty because of HIS actions or do you stand firm that it was Clinton's blow job that made him do illegal things?

Shesh.
Click to expand...

Clinton is the bottomless pit for weak and lame reasoning as to why no matter how bad a Republican has screwed up, there is always a Democrat who has done worse. When you can't argue the facts on a particular matter, you just pull out one of the standard GOP comebacks:

1) Clinton, Ted Kennedy, Al Sharpton, Hillary, Dean, did something that was way worse
2) What are you, are terrorist lover! Move to France!
3) Democrats kill babies everyday
4) Stop hating America

In the end:

1) DeLay has been pulling dirty tricks for a long time.

2) Last year he tried to get the Republican Conference rule changed so he could keep the leadership through the indictment HE KNEW WAS COMING

3) The change didn't go through, and after his co-conspritors started to fall, he has the nerve to say that the only reason this was going forward was because of the rule that would require him to step down

4) Ronnie Earle was pressing forward with the charges - AS IT IS HIS JOB TO DO

5) DeLay TURNED DOWN A PLEA - SO MUST HAVE EXPECTED THE CHARGE TO COME FORWARD

6) Now he has the warrent, and it serves him right

At least Clinton tried and suceeded at making life better for the common man.
DeLay, Abramoff, and all of their buddies are just croonie serving, power hunger, dirty politicans who I can't think of one thing they have done that was good for the general (including Democratic) American public.

DeLay makes Nixon look like Clinton. Dirty, Dirty, Dirty.

PS) They love to bring up Clinton's lie cause anything to do with sex is like taboo for the "moral" majority. Killing tens of thousands of innocents in Iraq is OK, but getting a little loving out of wed lock and you are going straight to you know where.
 
Last edited:
LOL, well said, python. Glad to see that I'm not the only one who's disgusted with this thread. I particularily like your synopsis:

1) DeLay has been pulling dirty tricks for a long time.

2) Last year he tried to get the Republican Conference rule changed so he could keep the leadership through the indictment HE KNEW WAS COMING

3) The change didn't go through, and after his co-conspritors started to fall, he has the nerve to say that the only reason this was going forward was because of the rule that would require him to step down

4) Ronnie Earle was pressing forward with the charges - AS IT IS HIS JOB TO DO

5) DeLay TURNED DOWN A PLEA - SO MUST HAVE EXPECTED THE CHARGE TO COME FORWARD

6) Now he has the warrent, and it serves him right

Though he's not been convicted of anything so far, I have yet to see anything credible that refutes any of the above. "It all Clinton's fault" does not do it for me. So if anyone out there has something, please share.
 
Deegan said:
We know Clinton was guilty, the jury is still out on Delay......I mean, you are still innocent until proven guilty, are you not?:confused:
Click to expand...

And where exactly in my post did you read that I assume DeLay is guilty?

And BTW, what exactly was Clinton guilty of doing? Getting a blowjob or lying under oath?

I used Clinton as an example because it was relevant, he was never issued a warrant, finger printed, or had his mug shot taken. It's called respect for a man who has yet to be proven guilty of anything, and this was dirty pool, of course Delay was going to show up to answer these charges.

I don't even like the guy, he has always rubbed me the wrong way, but I call em as I see em.
Click to expand...

So Clinton should of been cuffed, photographed and fingerprinted even if he was never formally indicted?

As for DeLay, he has been officially indicted. He still has his day in court, though. I believe it's mandatory, no?

So no, I don't see the relevancy at all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom