Top
Comments
36 Responses to “Earle hits DeLay with second indictment”
  1. David Johnson on October 3rd, 2005 at 5:43 pm

    Maybe so. But check out Powerline.

  2. Al Williams on October 3rd, 2005 at 6:43 pm

    The first one won’t stick, so he’s going for a second…

    The Poster Boy for term limits attacks the other Poster Boy for term limits…

    yawn.

  3. mzachtx on October 3rd, 2005 at 7:44 pm

    The debate here seems to be starting out much like the previous charge. Does anybody here see that the argument should not be on whether or not said charges are partisan(which i agree they might be-in part), but instead the focus should be on changing the system of funding for campaings. and jimb, i understand that you consider dropping 2 grand on a candidate is a matter of free speech, but we are talking about Billions of dollars, a large part of which are huge donations from major corporations-on both sides of the aisle. It appears to me to be a symptom of a horrible disease. And in response to those who say that transparency and a fundamental change in the funding system cannot work, i say you are fools for not being able to see what an accountable, transparent system of funding with controls for all contributions could do for this country. Well, maybe you do see what this could do. It would mean, of course that the source of power would inevitably shift more towards the PEOPLE. But i guess no one wants such change. http://alonetexasideal.blogspot.com/

  4. Jean on October 3rd, 2005 at 8:09 pm

    Someone needs to file against Earle for his dealings with corporations. Sounds like bribery to me. The guy is a jerk, I hope DeLay ‘hammers’ down.

  5. doctormonroe on October 3rd, 2005 at 9:11 pm

    Puh-lease.

    DeLay’s cooked. Frist’s under SEC investigation. Cheney & Rove are in the frame for Plame’s outing. Iraq is a mess. The deficit is unmanageable.

    What does it take for wingnut to smell the coffee?

  6. doctormonroe on October 3rd, 2005 at 9:11 pm

    Oh, I nearly forgot (probably because it seems so inconsequential). Bush is incompetent.

  7. jimb on October 3rd, 2005 at 9:38 pm

    Doc - About the only thing I agree with you in an unqualified manner from numbers 5 and 6 is that the deficit is indeed unmanageable. As for the rest, let the justice system decide. Innocent until proven guilty, remember?

    Besides, DeLay is proabably cooked, even if found not guilty or all charges dismissed. He’s tainted goods now, even if all of the charges turn out to be bogus. Perhaps this was Earle’s goal?

    Mzachtx - The campaign finance system is indeed a mess, but it is because nobody can agree the complicated question of how to pay for free speech, where the money should and should not come from, and how much should be allowed to be used. As long as nobody agrees, there will be those who use that to their advantage. Did DeLay? I am not sure (the trial and/or pre-trial activities will probably decide that) but the latest information about his first indictment being so apparently questionable is certainly interesting.

  8. jimb on October 3rd, 2005 at 9:39 pm

    Oh, by the way - what on Earth does “Bush is incompetent” have to do with the current subject?

  9. doctormonroe on October 3rd, 2005 at 9:55 pm

    I don’t really know. But he is, isn’t he?

  10. squawkbox on October 3rd, 2005 at 9:55 pm

    Whether DeLay is guilty or innocent does not matter to the liberals. What matters is that he has been removed as majority leader even if it is just for a short while.

  11. DanMan on October 3rd, 2005 at 9:57 pm

    Who is the judge? When did he leave town? When will he get back? What is his caseload? Was he shopped? Go dawgs, go!

  12. doctormonroe on October 3rd, 2005 at 9:59 pm

    Yes. “The Liberals” are crowing over the carcass of DeLay like the bloodsucking satanists they really are.

    Behold DeLay! Christ-like in his martyrdom.

  13. doctormonroe on October 3rd, 2005 at 10:01 pm

    Da judge is on vacation.

  14. DanMan on October 3rd, 2005 at 10:03 pm

    I know. Who he be?

  15. DanMan on October 3rd, 2005 at 10:05 pm

    I’m going out on a limb an guessing the doctor knows nothing….

  16. doctormonroe on October 3rd, 2005 at 10:07 pm
  17. doctormonroe on October 3rd, 2005 at 10:07 pm

    The Doc may not know. Bue he knows where to look. And thats all it takes.

  18. DanMan on October 3rd, 2005 at 10:11 pm

    Big deal you liberal moron…once the other questions are answered we’ll see what Ronnie does.

  19. doctormonroe on October 3rd, 2005 at 10:14 pm

    Oh. Now I’m a liberal moron? C’mon. You sound like a gruff billy goat. Which would make me a troll, no?

    Gotcha!

    PS: Admin - I hope you recognize satire, or should I say satyr!

  20. doctormonroe on October 3rd, 2005 at 10:20 pm
  21. doctormonroe on October 3rd, 2005 at 10:25 pm

    I don’t think Judge is a federalist…tee hee.

  22. doctormonroe on October 3rd, 2005 at 10:30 pm

    Just so we’re all clear on the authoritative Powerline source:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claremont_Institute

  23. DanMan on October 3rd, 2005 at 10:35 pm

    liberal moron…go to sleep and go to work

  24. doctormonroe on October 3rd, 2005 at 10:39 pm

    Good idea.

    Night night.

  25. jimb on October 3rd, 2005 at 11:31 pm

    Re: number 17

    Be careful you don’t tell Feagan that. You’re already supposed to know (and have the court’s records from the past 5 years in your filing cabinet). Otherwise, you arent’ really all that smart…

  26. malcolm on October 4th, 2005 at 7:23 am

    Admin:
    Do we have a doctor troll in our midst? What was the request from the editors about feeding and responding ………….?

  27. Feagan on October 4th, 2005 at 7:52 am

    I have spoken my peace re. Delay. From here on out I will let the courts settle his fate. Both state and federal.

    I will never understand why he is defended so blindly.

    You don’t need the last five years on hand, you just need to know how to read what you source, and understand what you read.

  28. Mike Martin on October 4th, 2005 at 7:52 am

    I don’t think doc is a troll. I don’t agree with much of what he says, but his opinions at least seem thought out and researched. He does get a bit fiery at times, but hey, ya gotta have someone to argue with. I’ve received a bit of name-calling from him, but I’m not thin-skinned, so no problem. I think my favorite was retarded juvenilia. My wife has described some of my views in harsher terms, and I’m not divorcing her.

  29. Feagan on October 4th, 2005 at 8:12 am

    When a person posts an opposing viewpoint, and is passionate in his/her position, and god forbid, willing to defend that position he/she risks being called a troll ?

  30. malcolm on October 4th, 2005 at 8:31 am

    It was a question, not an inquisition. I wanted to get others viewpoints. Good, passionate, informed dialog is always healthy and welcomed. Mud slinging, name calling and unsubstantiated “facts” from either side won’t accomplish anything or change anyones minds about an issue. It will only further the division between the two.

  31. rj on October 4th, 2005 at 10:45 am

    No. 27,
    “Defended so blindly”? Maybe its not only what the charges are and who’s behind them, but the fishing expeditions with the grand jury. Let see many does this make, er uh, 6 I think in 6 months.
    way to go Ronnie! And the libs complain about Starr’s attack on that sleeze bag clinton.
    No.29 Go back and look at LST’s definition of a troll.
    rj

  32. Matt Bramanti on October 4th, 2005 at 10:48 am

    Name-calling is out, y’all. Don’t make me turn this car around right now.

  33. jimb on October 4th, 2005 at 12:02 pm

    Calling DeLay’s first indictment out as politically motivated and/or bogus (especially if it is true that the allegations the indictment refer to were not illegal at the time) is not “blindly” defending anyone.

    The jury is still out folks, let the justice system do its thing.

  34. Robert on October 4th, 2005 at 1:28 pm

    To doctormonroe,

    If Bush is incompetent, then what would be the condition of this country under a Kerry presidency. How come we don’t hear from Kerry on what he would have done under these different circumstances?? Could it be he has NO PLAN but can complain with the rest of the Democrats??? President Bush gets an “A” for effort and only time will tell if his actions were good or not. Try holding judgement until all the facts are in. Jumping to conclusions brings your judgement into question.

  35. doctormonroe on October 4th, 2005 at 9:45 pm

    Did I even utter a barely audible whisper that Kerry would be doing better? No. I didn’t. That doesn’t take away from the fact that Bush is incompetent.

    I will say this: if we had different a president, I genuinely believe we would not be seeing the disintegration of our iraq policy. Bush is just not credible internationally, and to implement a sound foreign policy (or an unsound one for that matter) you simply have to have global credibility. Manipulating intelligence to justify the iraq invasion reeks, and its not just kerry supporters in the US who are reeling from the stench.

  36. malcolm on October 6th, 2005 at 7:40 am

    After 13 replies to this post we know where the doc stands.
    The last word.
    Next topic please.

Feel free to leave a comment...
and oh, if you want a pic to show with your comment, go get a gravatar!

You must be logged in to post a comment.

     Back to main page

Bottom