Greatest Blog Post of All Time

Ace and I haven’t seen eye to eye on this Schiavo issue, and he, I am sure, thinks I am overwrought and hysterical about the influence of the religious right. Let me, however, take a brief pause from the acrimony of the last few weeks for a moment of collegial comity, and note that this may be the greatest blog post of all time:

The Flame War Thread

Go ahead; it’s about time.

Let’s be honest: I don’t like any of you, and you don’t like each other. Which I can understand, because you’re a bunch of dribbling imbeciles, a pack of wild retards fighting with one another over who can best manage to stay within the lines while colorin’.

You can have your stupid moron-talk in this thread. It seems wrong to have you simpering fuckweasels jackassing around in a thread that is partly devoted to the death of Terri Schiavo.

So have at it, cretins. I wash my hands of the lot of you.


A Contrast

I was watching the Apprentice, which, btw, is not very compelling this season, and during a commercial break I flipped to cable news to see what was going on in the world of talking heads. On CNN, a respectable conversation with Bill Nelson and Jesse Jackson, who was alarmingly discrete, thoughtful and informative.

On Hannity and Colmes, Sean Hannity was acting as coxswain for the Schivao villification goons, leveling the possibility over and over again that Michael Schiavo caused his wife’s condition. This gem was repeated several times:

“I don’t know what happened here, but it sure looks supsicious.”

Not knowing things and still having strong opinions seems to be a recurring theme with many who ‘speak’ for the ‘conservative’ viewpoint. This jackal can’t even wait for the autopsy to be conducted before he begins poisoning the well with the new disinformation campaign. If he has his way, regardless of the outcome of the autopsy, people will be repeating the mantra that Michael Schiavo caused his wife’s brain damage.

No shame. None, whatsoever.

Things We Don’t Know

The stupid continues, even after Terri Schiavo’s death. Just heard Sean Hannity say the following:

“I never attacked Michael Schiavo. I don’t know if Michael Schiavo caused her condition, but I have questions that need to be answered.”

In that spirit, I offer the following:

I don’t know if Sean Hannity abuses his wife, but I have questions.

I don’t know if Sean Hannity buggers small children, but I have questions.

I don’t know if Sean Hannity likes putting whipped cream on his nipples and letting farm animals lick it off, but I have questions.

I think all of these questions should be addressed.

And The Assault on the Judiciary Continues

Tom DeLay, today:

Judicial activists killed Terri Schiavo, and they will pay.

That’s the message House Majority Leader Tom DeLay delivered a few minutes ago in his statement on the death of Terri Schiavo. DeLay said that Schiavo died because the legal system did not protect her, then he declared that “the time will come for the men responsible for this to answer for their behavior…”< Appearing on CNN this morning, Focus on the Family's James Dobson seemed to suggest that Congress reconsider the entire structure of the federal judicial system. Noting that the Constitution created the Supreme Court but left Congress with the authority to "ordain and establish" the lower courts, Dobson said members of Congress have "all sorts of power in dealing with the courts, but they haven't had the political gumption to do it." For example, Dobson said, Congress could simply "take away the franchise" of the left-of-center U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit "and then reestablish it the next day," presumably with more conservative judges in place.

Yes. That James Dobson. Really, though. Despite the thinly veiled and not-so-thinly veiled threats to dismantle the judiciary and remake it in God’s image, we have nothing to worry about.

Shorter Hugh Hewitt

As a service, I read Hugh Hewitt’s rant (‘Hating the Religious Right’) in the Weekly Standard denouncing John Danforth’s principled stand against the shift the Republican party has recently undertaken. It all boils down to these final sentences:

These and other developments have indeed mobilized new activists across the country, many of who see a vast disparity between what they believe ought to be public policy and what is becoming that policy by judicial fiat. They have every right to participate in politics, and they can be expected to refuse to support elected officials who ignore their concerns.

Attempts to silence them, marginalize them, or to encourage others to do so are not arguments against their positions, but admissions that those positions represent majorities that cannot be refused a place at the law-making table.

Shorter Hugh Hewitt:

Decrying a theocracy merely affirms the rights of theocrats to impose their rule.

Glad we got that cleared up.


West Virginia is get ready to vote on whether or not to allow table gaming, so this piece in the NY Times is timely:

Gambling revenues, once a mere trickle, have become a critical stream of income in a number of states, in some cases surpassing traditional sources like the corporate income tax and helping states lower personal income or property taxes.

The sums are so alluring that some officials are concerned that their states are becoming as addicted as problem gamblers. “We’re drunk on gambling revenue,” said Representative Wayne A. Smith, the Republican who is House majority leader in the Delaware Legislature. “Gambling revenues are like free money.”

In Rhode Island, South Dakota, Louisiana, Oregon and, most of all, Nevada, taxes from casinos, slot machines at racetracks and lotteries make up more than 10 percent of overall revenues, according to a new report. In Delaware, West Virginia, Indiana, Iowa and Mississippi, gambling revenues are fast approaching 10 percent.

Anyone have expertise in this area? My gut instinct is to allow it, but I am sensitive to arguments that gaming really doesn’t create wealth so much as amount to a self-imposed transfer payment, and I am aware of the bnumber of other problems that follow the gaming industry. However, I wouild like to know more.

DeLay Must Go

I don’t think I am being a ‘weak-kneed’ Republican, nor am I simply bending to the demands of my ‘liberal masters’ when I state that it is simply time for Tom DeLay to go. In the past, I have defended him, because I, too, instinctively suspect partisan politics in any ethics violation charge, particularly when characters like Ronnie Earle are involved.

However, it is increasingly apparent that Tom DeLay is as crooked as Forrest Gump’s back. The man, OUR MAJORITY LEADER, was admonished not once, not twice, but THREE times in the past few years for ethics violations. Those violations included:

– During the re-districting in Texas (supposedly a state issue), DeLay asked the FAA to track a plane thought to house the renegae Democratic legislators.

– Accepting what amounts to $56,000 in bribes from Westar Energy.

– Vote buying for the Medicare Prescription Drug Act.

Vote buying in the giveaway to the pharmaceutical industry- this is the type of corporate cronyism that the folks at Media Matters and MoveOn.Org salivate over. And that doesn’t even cover everything he has been accused of- which, granted, may turn out to be inaccurate. But with this kind of track record, you have to wonder. Currently, Ronnie Earle is slicing through DeLay’s inner circle like a hot knife through butter, and it appears there is nothing DeLay does not have his hands in.

Other antics include:

– DeLay obstructed justice for low-paid sweatshop workers on the island of Saipan by taking large campaign contributions from Saipan’s chief lobbyist and blocking any Congressional investigation of the appalling conditions there.

– DeLay obstructed justice by lying to the FBI when he charged that the reporter who broke the Henry Hyde adultery story in the 1990s had been working with the White House to expose Hyde.

– During a deposition for a lawsuit filed by a former business partner in the pest company in 1994, DeLay lied that he had not been an officer of the company for two or three years. On congressional financial disclosure forms filed in 1995, he listed himself as chairman of the company’s board of directors.

– In 1997, DeLay actually shoved Rep. David Obey [D-Wisconsin] and called him a “chicken shit” on the House floor. That same year, DeLay tried to impeach federal judges he didn’t like.

– In 1998, DeLay said that people with “foreign-sounding names” probably aren’t Americans.

You would think that someone who has caused the Republican party so much shame would think it would be wise to maintain a low profile, and would perhaps to work to better his image and change for the better. You would be wrong. Hubris produces more hubris, and DeLay’s response should have been a clear warning sign for everyone in the GOP:

House Republicans proposed changing their rules last night to allow members indicted by state grand juries to remain in a leadership post, a move that would benefit Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Tex.) in case he is charged by a Texas grand jury that has indicted three of his political associates, according to GOP leaders.

The proposed rule change, which several leaders predicted would win approval at a closed meeting today, comes as House Republicans return to Washington feeling indebted to DeLay for the slightly enhanced majority they won in this month’s elections. DeLay led an aggressive redistricting effort in Texas last year that resulted in five Democratic House members retiring or losing reelection. It also triggered a grand jury inquiry into fundraising efforts related to the state legislature’s redistricting actions.

Can’t live ethically? Easy- change what is considered ethical. And rather than serving as a warning, DeLay’s infuence is such that the ethical backbone of the party is corroding from the inside out:

House GOP leaders and aides said many rank-and-file Republicans are eager to change the rule to help DeLay, and will do so if given a chance at today’s closed meeting. A handful of them have proposed language for changing the rule, and they will be free to offer amendments, officials said. Some aides said it was conceivable that DeLay and Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) ultimately could decide the move would be politically damaging and ask their caucus not to do it. But Rep. Jack Kingston (Ga.), another member of the GOP leadership, said he did not think Hastert and DeLay would intervene.

Tom DeLay is crooked, self-serving, hypocritical, unethical, bigoted, unprincipled (unless the principle is power), a loudmouth bully boy and venomous attack dog, incapable of recognizing the separation of powers, and, since that isn’t going to be enough for many of you, let’s put it in a framework of self-preservation:

Tom DeLay is bad for the Republican party.

Even the WSJ is getting in on the act:

Say what you want about The Wall Street Journal editorial page, but they are consistent in their minimum regard for ethical mores in Washington. And ominously for DeLay, the page has begun to view him as an example of whats wrong with the capital. If that machine produces an odor, as the Journal editorial writers put it, it doesnt absolve DeLay that he smells just like the Beltway itself.

As I stated before, Tom DeLay represents the “I got mine, screw everybody else” wing of the GOP that has got to be purged. Look at thge unprincipled and vicious attacks DeLay has levied on the judiciary, Judge Greer, Michael Schiavo, and anyone else who dared to disagree with him regarding the tragic Schiavo case.

Tom DeLay is a moral midget and an unethical hired gun that we need to get rid of. I understand many of you think that he is vital to advance a ‘conservativee’ agenda. Not so. If Tom DeLay is still the majority leader in 2006, I won’t be voting Republican. I may not vote for the Democrats, but I will not be voting Republican. I have a conscience and I need to sleep at night.

And for those of you who think DeLay must go, but think that calling for him to be pushed aside or step down weakens Republicans and strengthens Democrats, pay no attention to the calls from Democrats- they probably do have their own partisan reasons for wanting DeLay gone. But when you treat the human body for cancer, it is inevitable that the chemotherapy will weaken the body in the short term. This is, however far preferrable for letting the cancer remain and grow.

More here.

Hell. Try this on for size. Go here and read the dossier. Then, every time you see the name Tom DeLay, insert the names “Hillary Clinton” or “Ted Kennedy.” Tell me what you think when you look at it that way. I don’t think it is too much to demand better behavior than what we would demand from the villified opposition.