DeLay retires from Congress

Tony said:
I have a thing for making fun of white trash.
Click to expand...

And doing a bang-up job of it, I must say. We're all sharing lusty tales of your adventures here around the trailer park. You're practically a legend.
 
Tony said:
I do love this, you can't follow a simple exchange. It's funny.
Click to expand...

Tony, Tony, Tony,

You complained about "ad homs," yet you proceeded to call people "White trash" and "retarded."

Do you see any hypocrisy here?

BTW,

Do you have any people in your family with Down's Syndrome? Have you ever worked with people who have it? I suggest you do; it may actually improve your thinking. Throwing around the term "retard" is not good form. Wouldn't you say?
 
BPSCG said:
It's not a win for the Repubs; more a case of getting rid of an albatross.
Click to expand...

Yeah, and since they're getting rid of albatrosses - I'm glad they FINALLY got rid of Andrew Card - especially before he endorses torture, accepts dirty money or shoots someone in the face.

What was THAT all about? He was a fairly innocuous character, yet DeLie's "resignation" was heralded as a win?
 
Did anyone else hear about DeLay's appearance on Chris Matthews Tuesday? Apparently Harry Shearer got pre-show discussion on tape. Matthews is telling DeLay something about focus group polling on Democrats, and there is something about Hillary Clinton being viewed as a "know-it-all." DeLay's response?

"Nothing worse than a know-it-all woman."

Such a nice guy.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/harry-shearer/found-object-delay-on-ha_b_18506.html
 
Last edited:
pgwenthold said:
Did anyone else hear about DeLay's appearance on Chris Matthews Tuesday? Apparently Harry Shearer got pre-show discussion on tape. Matthews is telling DeLay something about focus group polling on Democrats, and there is something about Hillary Clinton being viewed as a "know-it-all." DeLay's response?

"Nothing worse than a know-it-all woman."

Such a nice guy.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/harry-shearer/found-object-delay-on-ha_b_18506.html
Click to expand...

So I'm to assume you can think of something worse?
 
Mike B. said:
Tony, Tony, Tony,

You complained about "ad homs," yet you proceeded to call people "White trash" and "retarded."

Do you see any hypocrisy here?
Click to expand...

No, if you back and read the exchange, you'll see there was no argument. It was merely a flame war.

Do you have any people in your family with Down's Syndrome? Have you ever worked with people who have it? I suggest you do; it may actually improve your thinking. Throwing around the term "retard" is not good form. Wouldn't you say.
Click to expand...

Are you telling me I should be PC?
 
Oops. Not so fast. As it turns out, DeLay may be forced to run. The delicious irony of this is that DeLay fled the state of Texas in order to get himself thrown off the ballot, but the courts have (so far) ruled that this is just a ploy to sidestep the rules. He won the primary so he has to run. Flashback now to a couple of years ago when DeLay used Homeland Security to track down renagade Democrats in the Texas legislature to keep them from bottling up the redistricting legislation.

Hoist by his own petard.

AUSTIN - Republicans' efforts to replace former U.S. Rep. Tom DeLay as their nominee for the 22nd Congressional District came to a halt Thursday when a federal judge ruled that DeLay must stay on the November ballot.
The ruling was seen as a key victory for the Texas Democratic Party, which hopes to keep the scandal-plagued DeLay on the ballot and use him as an example of congressional abuse of power to win the race and raise money nationally.
Click to expand...
 
Tricky said:
Oops. Not so fast. As it turns out, DeLay may be forced to run. The delicious irony of this is that DeLay fled the state of Texas in order to get himself thrown off the ballot, but the courts have (so far) ruled that this is just a ploy to sidestep the rules. He won the primary so he has to run.
Click to expand...
More irony: The 2002 New Jersey senatorial election:
Lautenberg unexpectedly returned to politics in 2002, when the other New Jersey senator, Democrat Robert Torricelli, withdrew his candidacy for reelection, because of corruption charges...The New Jersey Republican Party challenged the replacement of Torricelli's name on the ballot with Lautenberg's, arguing that it came too late according to state election laws. The ballot name change was upheld by the New Jersey Supreme Court, and the U.S. Supreme Court declined to take up the case. Lautenberg won the election, thus becoming one of very few people in recent times to return to the Senate after leaving it.
Click to expand...
Don't recall the details, but I believe SCOTUS declined to review it based on the constitutional principle that the individual states regulate their own elections.

Now if a federal judge ruled that Delay has to stay on the ballot, could he appeal that decision on the grounds that there is no federal issue, that the decision would have to be made by a state judge?

BTW, Delay now lives in Alexandria, Virginia, which probably infuriates the entire Alexandria City Council no end...:D

ETA: No, not my neighborhood.
 
If Delay won the election, would he be eligible to serve?

1. Because his resignation from the congressional race is non-binding?

2. Because despite his claim of non-residency the court has decided he really is a resident and thus eligible to serve for that district?

3. Because so far he hasn't been convicted of anything and indictments don't preclude an individual from being a congressman?
 
davefoc said:
If Delay won the election, would he be eligible to serve?

1. Because his resignation from the congressional race is non-binding?

2. Because despite his claim of non-residency the court has decided he really is a resident and thus eligible to serve for that district?

3. Because so far he hasn't been convicted of anything and indictments don't preclude an individual from being a congressman?
Click to expand...
Yes, I think he'd be eligible to serve.

1. His quitting the race has nothing to do with it. The judge ruled that his withdrawal does not allow his name to be replaced on the ballot. So if he gets the most votes, then he's elected. His resignation from Congress in the current term also has no effect.

2. I am confused about this too. I guess they said that whatever state law says, the federal constitution has primacy in determining eligibility to serve.

3. Even conviction for a crime doesn't automatically get you the boot. But it can incent the House of Reps to eject you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom