More on DeLay: Chris Bell's Take
Since Tom DeLay's indictment serves as one more ounce of justification of Chris Bell's year-old ethics complaint on the bugman, it's worth noting two clips for your informational enjoyment:
It's worth adding that Conaway is the rare Republican freshman who does not owe his seat to Tom DeLay. Rather, he owes it to Texas House Speaker Tom Craddick's obstinate desire to have a congressional seat based in the Midland/Odessa metropolis ... which also happens to be Tom Craddick's home turf.
Another odd point in the clip, as noted in the comments of a prior post, is that there seems to be a confusing point in the GOP talking points: Jim Mattox is still a Democrat, folks! I don't think it's an accident that Texas Republican John Culberson has a misleading comment in his (likely) cut and pasted defense of DeLay, as well as Chris Matthews rat-a-tat-tatting questions to Bell & Conaway, and now some online posters are following up on the meme that Mattox was one of the Republicans that Ronnie Earle targetted.
Apparently, these folks are as sharp with their talking points as they are with their legal notes. That sure would explain why they're in the hole they're in.
This is a bit more informational in regards to letting Chris show how the ethical problems aren't just limited to Tom DeLay or even the US Congress (bad though they appear to be getting nowadays). Chris refers to the current seemingly revived truce between the parties as a "self-preservation society" in Congress. What struck me as odd about that is that that seems to be something that the GOP ran against in 1994. Of course, then, they followed the Democratic ethics problems with a call for term limits. Of course, if you believe anything Kevin Whited has to say, you'd be convinced that term limits are an ongoing concern for the GOP. But I won't bother taxing the readers' sense of fiction.
Movements like that of Chris' push for ethics reform at the state level are the next logical step for Democrats to take. It's not enough to stand on the sidelines and hope the other side implodes enough to just walk in the door. Victories like that are fleeting and rare. Victories built upon a movement and an idea are far more lasting, yet tougher when fought in the trenches. Those are the fights worth investing some blood, sweat and tears into.
Of course, it's also good to see Chris exhibit the moral clarity that comes with properly identifying Tom DeLay as the most corrupt politician in America today. For over a year now, I've been asking Republicans to name a more corrupt politician and they've come up short every time. Maybe the whole Jim Mattox fiasco of theirs will boomerang on them and they'll try pinning Tom DeLay as a Democrat someday.
UPDATE: Team Bell catches a USA Today article which has some recent Mattox quotage. By the way, he's still a Dem, too ;-)
Jim Mattox, a former Democratic congressman and Texas attorney general, was charged by Earle with bribery in 1983. Mattox was found not guilty but said he's still "angry and disappointed" by the effect it had on his political career and family.Still, Mattox called Earle a tenacious person carrying out his responsibilities. "A lesser individual might have given up this fight," he said. "Most people that know Ronnie would not question his integrity."
And that's from a guy who got the book thrown at him by Earle!
That's quite a reach on Kevin's post from March Greg. I understand that you have a feud on-going with he and Chris Elam, but using a post where Kevin points out (correctly) R.G. Ratcliffe's inaccuracies in a story as "proof" Kevin supports the old Repub plan for term limits is revisionist at best.
Politicians run on term limits, but when they get in office they realize what they would be giving away, and that dream dissapears.
My take on the whole DeLay issue is dissapointment, not because DeLay was indicted (I could care less and have called for him -and many other's- to step down long ago, this incictment doesn't change that. What does dissapoint me is that the next election is going to be devoid of any meaningful legislative information. It's all going to be Smear and Gloating.
Oh well....
S.
It's not a reach when Kevin goes so far as to back up the very point I make in the comments of that post. The grander point, of course, is that Tom DeLay never believed in term limits. If there's one person responsible for the turning of GOP tail on that issue, it's him and him alone (well, ok, and the multitude of other GOP congressmen who found out they loved power more than principle).
I'm not entirely sure the '06 elections are going to be as void as you suggest. I mean, they might and they might not. I don't know that DeLay's indictment really does anything to effect that other than raise the very substantive issue of ethics reform, which IMO ought to be up there every election cycle regardless of who's in power.