Tom DeLay extremely frustrated

DeLay is calling for a review of the judicial system for not deciding the way of he and Bush on the Schiavo case.

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2005/04/01/MNGCLC1Q5M1.DTL

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2005/apr2005/schi-a02.shtml

'Pulling a small copy of the US Constitution out of his pocket, DeLay told reporters, “We will look at an arrogant, out of control, unaccountable judiciary that thumbed their nose at the Congress and president when given jurisdiction to hear this case anew and look at the facts.” Asked if he would support impeachment proceedings against judges in the Schiavo case, DeLay replied, “There’s plenty of time to look into that.”'

.

 

DeLay pretty much threatened the judges which is a Federal Offense. DeLay is just trying to distract the public from his ethics scandal. BTW: Just a few months ago Tom Delay took his own father off of life support/feeding tube. He's a split tongue double talkin' hypocrite of the lowest order. I guess he never heard of the concept called Separation of Powers.

 

Thank you for posting those links. Both articles were well written and well thought out. Its true that the media is ignoring Judge Birch's remarks on the case and they are ignoring the fact that he is VERY conservative. There seems to be a growing difference between old school conservative Republicans and neo-conservative Republicans.

 

I hate DeLay...people like him and Bush make me embarrassed to admit being a Texan...

 

Not only that, but he and his family sued the manufacturer of a bearing that failed on the tram his father and uncle built. When his father and uncle tested it, it crashed and the accident is what put his father on life support.

But just watch him get behind Bush's crusade to limit liability settlement payments! Two-faced bastid!

 

Delay's father was on far more than a feeding tube; he wasn't starved or dehydrated to death by its removal.

As for the judiciary, his point is very valid. Nullifying "Terri's Law" was a raw display of judicial hubris.

 

Why do conservatives always cry "judicial activism" when they don't get their way? I'll admit that there are instances where that may be the case, but in the Terri Schiavo case the law was CLEARLY ON HER HUSBAND'S SIDE!

Tom DeLay is a despicable human being; I can't imagine how he keeps getting reelected.

 

Perhaps the judiciary didn't think that "Terri's Law" would stand as constitutional. A similar narrow-focus law attempted in Florida was ruled unconstitutional. And the Congressional "law" was passed in the early morning hours by voice vote alone - there wasn't even a quorum present, which is usually the way laws get enacted in this country - unless one wants to railroad something through. Guesstimates put the number of senators present at the time of the vote at five and John Warner did not vote. That is not how "laws" are enacted. At least not in the USA I grew up in.

Hip waders not mandatory - but strongly suggested. Gas masks optional.

 

DeLay and Bush were trying to adjudicate from the legislative and executive branches. It's much the same as the 'legislating from the bench' that they have publicly deplored so many times.

It's still hard to believe that Bush actually took time off from vacation at his ranch to go back to DC to sign the legislation. He sat on his rear end the whole month of August right before 911 and did nothing when he had memos warning him of problems, yet he will jump to interfere with the judicial system at a moment's notice. Strange.

 

The law might have been on her husband's side before it was changed by the duly elected state legislature. Then the court steps in and says that the legislature overstepped it's authority by daring to change the law! Last time I checked, that was precisely the purview of the legislature, not the judiciary.

 

Tom DeLay’s Corruption Disqualifies Him from Leadership


Help His Colleagues Choose Decency over DeLay

Dear Mike,


Does your Representative support Decency, or DeLay? Ask them to Speak Up Now.

The U.S. Congress is perhaps the most potent image of representative democracy in the world. Yes, sometimes its members fail to act wisely, and sometimes they don't live up to our ideals. Still, those two chambers filled with delegates of the people are the heart of what our country is about.

House of Representatives Majority Leader Tom DeLay has dishonored the people's house. His pattern of unethical and illegal behavior is an offense to democracy itself, and he must step down from his leadership post.

Ask your Representative to stand up against Tom DeLay’s abuses. Just click "Reply" and "Send" if you’re a TrueMajority member, and we’ll forward that message to your Representative (text below). If you aren’t a member, or this was forwarded to you, click here to send the message.

http://truemajority.kintera.org/dumpdelay

Although he's a leader of the body that creates rules for the rest of us, Tom DeLay is so flagrantly unethical his own party members have condemned him three times. He's taken illegal gifts from foreign lobbyists.1 He's admitted to bribing another member for his vote.2 He may yet be criminally indicted for using illegal corporate money for campaigns.3 He even tried to have Congress’ own rules changed so that, if indicted, he could hold on to his powerful leadership position. (Congress chose to stand up to him on that one.)

Is this the person who should lead the majority in the greatest democratic legislature in the world?

Let's challenge our representatives to ask Tom DeLay to step down as House Majority leader. The challenge boils down to this: Does your member of Congress stand with Decency, or DeLay?

TrueMajority members, click "reply" and "send"; if you’re not yet a member click here to send your message to Congress. http://truemajority.kintera.org/dumpdelay

Yours in working toward a government worthy of America,

Matt Holland
Online Organizer

Here’s the message we’ll send to your representative in Congress:

Dear (We’ll insert your representative’s name here),

Americans are embarrassed and offended by the behavior of House Majority Leader Tom DeLay. Your own colleagues have repeatedly said his actions are unethical, and his twisting of the democratic process is a matter of public record.

I don’t think that Tom DeLay is ethically fit to serve as House majority leader - do you?

When members of Congress have spoken out in the past, corrupt leaders have been forced to step down. The time has come to take a side, so I am asking today: do you stand for Decency, or do you stand behind Tom DeLay?

Sincerely,

(We’ll put your name here)

References:

[1] A Foreign Agent Paid for a Luxury Trip to South Korea for DeLay and his wife. The trip was paid for by the Korea-US Exchange Council. The group registered under the Foreign Agents Registration Act and was created with help from a lobbying firm headed by DeLay's former chief of staff. The cost to send DeLay, his wife and other lawmakers for three days was $106,921. (Washington Post, 3/10/05)

[2] The House ethics committee found that DeLay offered to help former Congressman Nick Smith's son Brad, who was running for Congress at the time, in exchange for Smith's vote on the Medicare prescription drug bill. The House Ethics Committee gave DeLay a public admonishment. Smith originally claimed that DeLay mentioned $100,000 in contributions, but later stated that no specific figure was mentioned. (Roll Call, 11/22/04)

[3] "DeLay Ethics Allegations Now Cause of GOP Concern", Washington Post,
March 14, 2005. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A32389-2005Mar13.html

(These stories, summarized at AlterNet, are only a few of the many cases of DeLay’s ethical lapses reported in the press. Here are more

DeLay Received Campaign Contributions from Executives at Westar Energy, to Give the Company "a Seat at the Table" at Energy Bill Negotiations. The House Ethics Committee admonished DeLay for his dealings with top officers of Westar Energy. Some of the officers wrote memos citing their belief that $56,500 in campaign contributions to political committees associated with DeLay and other Republicans would get them "a seat at the table" where key legislation was being drafted. (Washington Post, 10/7/04)

DeLay Used a Federal Agency for Partisan Politics, an action prohibited by House Standards of Official Conduct. On May 12, 2003 DeLay's office asked the FAA for assistance in locating an aircraft carrying Texas state legislators. (Summary of Complaint Against Rep. Tom DeLay Filed By Chris Bell, 6/8/04) The House Ethics Committee admonished DeLay, stating, "Your intervention in a partisan conflict in the Texas House of Representatives ... raises serious concerns under House standards ... that preclude use of government resources for a political undertaking." (National Journal Congress Daily, 10/7/04)

DeLay Associates Charged with Illegal Money Laundering. Three of DeLay's top political associates were indicted by a Texas grand jury on charges of illegally raising money from corporations and funneling the funds into the campaigns of GOP candidates for the Texas Legislature (CQ Today, 3/11/05).

DeLay Allegedly Used $190,000 in Illegal Corporate Contributions to Influence Elections. According to a complaint filed by former Congressman Chris Bell (D-Tex.), a state PAC managed by DeLay aide Jim Ellis, contributed $190,000 in illegal corporate funds to the RNC. (Summary of Complaint Against Rep. Tom DeLay Filed By Chris Bell, 6/8/04).

The GOP Leadership Stacked the House Ethics Committee with Members Sympathetic to DeLay. Ethics committee Chairman, Rep. Joel Hefley (R-Colo.), was replaced by Rep. Richard Hastings (R-Wash.), a trusted ally of House Speaker Dennis Hastert. The other new Republicans on the panel, Reps. Lamar Smith (R-Tex.) and Tom Cole (R-Okla.), each gave DeLay $5,000 for his legal defense fund. These new committee members can be trusted to view DeLay's behavior in a more charitable light. (Sarasota Herald-Tribune, 2/7/05; Houston Chronicle, 2/7/05)

Two months after Gambling Interests Paid for DeLay's Luxury Trip to Europe, He Helped Kill a Bill that the Funders of his London Junket Opposed. The cost of the trip totaled $4,285.35. The payment was funneled through lobbyist Jack Abramoff. (Washington Post, 3/1/05) Abramoff suggested the trip and then arranged for checks to be sent by two of his clients, the Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians and eLottery Inc. Two months after the trip, DeLay helped kill the Internet Gambling Prohibition Act, which would have made it a federal crime to place certain bets over the Internet and was opposed by eLottery and the Choctaws. (Washington Post, 3/12/05)

Contribute
If you like what you see, please click here to contribute to keep these messages going to more people!

Subscribe
If this was forwarded to you and you'd like to join up, just click this link: http://truemajority.kintera.org/register

TrueMajority.org, 191 Bank Street, Third Floor, Burlington, VT 05401

 

And the test of constitutionality doesn't fit into your version of reality? That law didn't seek to remove a spouse for speaking for a spouse in the absence of other recognized directives. It was written specifically for Terri Schiavo. And the court was right to strike it down.

 

Kilgore Trout, if only that would work.

 

I'll have to look into this.

 

http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/schiavo/bill31905.html

http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/03/24/cassel.schiavo/


"Initially, the legislation was broadly conceived, and written to cover all incapacitated persons who did not have "living wills" and "advance medical directives" (instruments directing a medical surrogate to make health-care decisions when one is unable to do so and also stating what type of artificial life-sustaining measures one would or would not want to have employed).

But when the broader legislation got bogged down in details and arguments over the impact it would have on state laws governing living wills and medical directives, in effect ordering a federal remedy that could supplant state procedures, both houses began crafting legislation specifically for Terri Schiavo and no one else."

.

 

When DeLay doesn't get his way he starts threatening people. I was, in fact, against letting Terri Shaivo die of thirst, BUT I did not think that the Separation of Powers, that keeps our country safe as possible from people like DeLay, should have been breached in this case or any other.

I don't find thier actions odd, though. First they got an act of Congress to "save" Shaivo, then, when it was shown that the majority of Americans (including their "base") was against this being done, they left it alone. Notice that after the polls about Terri came out, and even the majority of Repubicans said Terri's husband could be able to do what he wanted with her, Bush, (Jeb and W) DeLay and everyone else involved suddenly started with "my hands are tied." They don't want to piss off their base, Their "decisions" in the Shaivo case had NOTHING to do with personal morality, and everything to do with their own power. She was then left to die, but the people who claimed to be on her side, when it looked like the polls were against them, claimed powerlessness.

They are Hypocrite assfaces.

Something could have been done, to save ms Schaivo, without disrupting the Separtion of Powers, but when the Conservatives realized the polls were against them, they let it go. THESE are people ANY of us should trust?

If anyone should be inpeached, DeLay has done the most to deserve it.

 

Yesterday, Dick Cheney told DeLay to shut up.

 

hahaha

what was all that about?

 

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!! I'd PAY to see that one!

Thanks, shaggie. That Cheney, what a cut up.

 

What exactly could have been done?