# If you don't like the rules, change them.



## BigDaddy (Mar 4, 2002)

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20041117/ap_on_go_co/delay

Interesting reading at the URL above. Republicans have changed the rules so that DeLay can retain his leadership role while being investigated for a felony.

Curse that liberal media for smearing the name of good Republicans!


----------



## Gunner (Oct 30, 2002)

BD, we could have you investigated for child porn--does that make you guilty of the offense? :huh:


----------



## BigDaddy (Mar 4, 2002)

Gunner: DeLay was indicted for a felony, not just investigated for one. That suggests to me that there was sufficient evidence to bring charges. The issue at hand is that long-standing rules were changed for one guy.


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

> Gunner: DeLay was indicted for a felony, not just investigated for one


 The thread should be " if you don't like what the story says, change it"  
Your story clearly states that Delay wasn't indicted????


> There is no indication DeLay will be indicted by the Austin grand jury in a probe led by a Democratic prosecutor, Ronnie Earle.


You have to quit drinking so much :lol:
.


----------



## Militant_Tiger (Feb 23, 2004)

I saw the whole story on this, and frankly I'm disusted. The republicans put the law up to show their moral integrity when two democrats were allowed to keep their positions while being indited, yet they change it when a republican is in the same situation. Some of these guys couldn't get any more hypocritical.


----------



## Ron Gilmore (Jan 7, 2003)

Both those Dem's where convicted and one I do believe is still serving time. The real issue here is not any federal law that was changed but simply non binding rule. Since the news pundents do not see this as an issue. CBS,NBC etc and are not doing in depth and detailed speculations on it I think it may be time for you to put the cool-aid down and go get some air. 

If Delay is charged and the information in those charges show a indication of guilt he will be gone.


----------



## Ron Gilmore (Jan 7, 2003)

House Ethics Leaders: Democrat Exaggerated Complaint Against DeLay 
NewsMax.com Wires
Friday, Nov. 19, 2004 
WASHINGTON - House ethics committee leaders say the complaint that led to a rebuke of Republican leader Tom DeLay in October was filled with exaggerations. They warned lawmakers of possible discipline if it happens again.

The complaint against DeLay by Rep. Chris Bell, D-Texas, violated a committee rule barring use of "innuendo, speculative assertions or conclusory statements," ethics Chairman Joel Hefley and senior Democrat Alan Mollohan wrote Bell. 
Story Continues Below

Hefley, of Colorado, and Mollohan, of West Virginia, also used the four-page letter to place all House members on notice that future use of exaggerations and innuendoes could result in dismissal of the complaint in addition to disciplinary action.
The letter to Bell was not a disciplinary action.

Bell lost in a primary earlier this year because of a redistricting plan engineered by DeLay, a fellow Texan.

A freshman, Bell said he had "grave concerns that this is going to intimidate other members from coming forward to file meritorious complaints in the future. We need to work to open the ethics process up, not clamp it down. This is further evidence that the ethics process in the House is broken and needs to be fixed."

The committee rejected Bell's view in a statement released Friday. It said the letter to Bell was "not intended to inhibit" members from filing ethics complaints and it should not have that effect.

'Review Carefully'

"Instead, the effect of this action should be to prompt any member who is considering filing a complaint to review its contents carefully and to ensure that the complaint does not contain any of the objectionable elements that are identified here," the statement said.

The committee letter was delivered to Bell's office Thursday.

Bell's complaint was not dismissed, the letter said, because it contained allegations against DeLay that warranted consideration, and because the committee had not previously rejected any complaint for violations of the rule against innuendo and speculation.

The committee concluded in October that DeLay appeared to link political donations to a legislative favor and improperly persuaded federal aviation authorities to intervene in a Texas political dispute.

Hefley and Mollohan wrote Bell, "Indeed, it appears there is no purpose for including excessive or inflammatory language or exaggerated charges in a complaint except in an attempt to attract publicity and hence, a political advantage."

Democrat 'Contempt and Reckless Disregard'

DeLay spokeswoman Shannon Flaherty said the letter "demonstrates the contempt and reckless disregard Chris Bell has shown for the Ethics Committee and its members by knowingly violating the rules of the House to advance his and his party leadership's political agenda of personal destruction."

The letter said the most serious exaggeration was Bell's contention that DeLay violated a bribery law "by soliciting campaign contributions" from a Kansas corporation, Westar Energy, in return for legislative assistance on an energy bill.

"There can hardly be a more serious charge against a public official than that he or she solicited a bribe," the committee letter said. It added that DeLay's actions "did not come even close to supporting this extremely serious claim."

The committee found in October that DeLay "created an appearance" of favoritism when he mingled at a 2003 golf outing with Westar executives just days after they contributed to a political organization associated with DeLay.

Bell's complaint also asserted:

That the majority leader "engaged in a concerted and relentless effort to use the official resources of office" for "blatantly partisan political activities."
The Hefley-Mollohan letter said the facts did not support this broad allegation.

That DeLay dispensed special favors to Westar.
The committee said Bell's complaint cited no action taken by DeLay for Westar. The committee's findings did say that Westar was seeking help with legislation at the time of the golf outing.

That DeLay was solely responsible for federal aviation authorities tracking down an airplane in an effort to locate Democrat lawmakers fleeing the state. The legislators left Texas in an effort to prevent state Republican legislators from passing DeLay's redistricting plan.
The letter said it was a misstatement to attribute actions of federal officials solely to DeLay, when the Texas Department of Public Safety also contacted federal aviation authorities.

DeLay contacted the FBI in the effort to locate the Texas lawmakers.
The letter said there is no indication that DeLay called the FBI.

Democrat Uses Campaign Money to Go to Grammys

In another development, the committee decided to take no action against Rep. Karen McCarthy, D-Mo., after finding that she misused campaign funds for a trip to the Grammy Awards and refused to repay the money.

"I'm pleased the committee recommended no action, as I know I did nothing wrong," she said in a statement.

McCarthy announced her retirement last year after allegations, first reported by The Associated Press, that she improperly used her campaign and people on her House staff for personal benefit.


----------



## Militant_Tiger (Feb 23, 2004)

So because part of the suit might be somewhat puffed out from what originally happened he shouldn't have to follow the rules? Oh I get it now, yep you republicans and your good ethics...


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

Can you guys not understand English? He was *not* indicted. It was all an exaggeration. Much like all the pre election garbage many suckered for. Also, they didn't change laws, they changed rules.

This was frustrating before the election, but now I am enjoying the more humorous aspect of it. No matter how much you want to believe this it will not make it so. I can't remember, but I think it was Lincoln that said, you can fool some of the people all the time (you know who you are), you can fool all the people some of the time, but you can't fool all the people all of the time.


----------



## BigDaddy (Mar 4, 2002)

Plainsman, Chill out. You are right, DeLay was not indicted. My mistake.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

Bigdaddy
No problem. I wasn't kidding I was frustrated before the election, but am having fun now. The little jab about fooling some of the people all of the time was meant for those who suckered for every rumor before the election. I'm realistic enough to realize that as sportsmen we perhaps agree on much more than we disagree about. The crazy thing is many of us want the same thing, we just see different political roads to the same goal.

I think there is a bright spot in the future. Many democrats still don't get it, and you could have knocked me over with a feather when on TV right after the election James Carvell in an interview said, the democratic party needs to step back and reevaluate the direction of the party. Now if the republicans would become a little more environmentally supportive, and if the democrats would drop the gun control, and would stop trying to garner votes by supporting *special rights *for every goofball group in the country then we would have a win win situation.


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

Big Daddy, your right about one thing the whole issue is typical of the arrogance of politicians and the Republicans will take a well deserved 
hit if they keep doing stuff like this. You would think that the lesson would be learned after watching the Democrats suffer from political arrogance gained from 40 years of rule. Politicians may have different opinions on issues but they are all cut from the same pile of Crap no matter what side they represent. Its a shame.


----------



## Militant_Tiger (Feb 23, 2004)

"Now if the republicans would become a little more environmentally supportive, and if the democrats would drop the gun control, and would stop trying to garner votes by supporting special rights for every goofball group in the country then we would have a win win situation."

I completely agree with the democrat side of that, I also wish the republicans (Bush) would admit that we had the wrong reasoning for going into Iraq, and in reality it was not just. Kerry is supposed to run in 2008, if he softens up on the gun policies we just might have a president that we can all agree on, well most of us at least.


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

> I completely agree with the democrat side of that, I also wish the republicans (Bush) would admit that we had the wrong reasoning for going into Iraq, and in reality it was not just. Kerry is supposed to run in 2008, if he softens up on the gun policies we just might have a president that we can all agree on, well most of us at least.


They weren't wrong and it was just, have you ever read what Iraq was like under Saddam, no kidding you really need to research it. That guy was every bit the monster Hitler was, worse in fact. Don't let partisanship color your understanding of history, read about Saddam. Please consider this is a suggestion, not an attempt to belittle because I'm not.

Kerry won't win the nomination again he blew his chance. I think it will be Hillary, she has already started to rewrite her position and swing to the middle and shes a lot smarter than Kerry. Hillary/Obama would be a very formidable pair.


----------



## Militant_Tiger (Feb 23, 2004)

I still really don't think it is our place to go into the middle east and root out trouble makers unless they are making trouble for us, especially in these days when we are already hated in the area, and especially when it was crimes commited 20 some years ago. I do think Kerry will win the nomination, handily. Hillary is not well liked, at least not by the dems I know. Kerry should win, especially after this being such a close election.


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

The hope is that we can change the culture over there and over time democracy will take hold and there will be enough commerce and opportunity for the comman man so that they will have a stake in their society. If that happens it will be lot harder for some nutcase fundamental Jihadist to talk them into joining thier cause, which will make us safer.
These problems are a lot more than twenty years old and they will take more than that much time to completely go away, but the first step on any journey must be taken. There are a lot of things Bush can be criticized for but you watch, he will be credited with a lot of good decisions some day, when all the partisanship dies down and the whole episode is looked back upon.


----------



## Militant_Tiger (Feb 23, 2004)

"The hope is that we can change the culture over there and over time democracy will take hold and there will be enough commerce and opportunity for the comman man so that they will have a stake in their society. "

It is not our place to do so however, these are not colonial times and we have no right to attempt to preform colonialism.

"There are a lot of things Bush can be criticized for but you watch, he will be credited with a lot of good decisions some day, when all the partisanship dies down and the whole episode is looked back upon."

This could go either way, I personally think in 10 years he will be looked at as one of the top 5 worst presidents.


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

Hey Tiger if you highlight the words you want to quote and then hit the quote button it will appear in white in your post and its easier to distinguish as a quote.

Oh and your wrong as usaul :lol: I have to go to bed goodnight.


----------



## aupeters (Jun 29, 2004)

I still really don't think it is our place to go into the middle east and root out trouble makers unless they are making trouble for us


> Militant Tiger-
> 
> Do you think it was ok for them to come over here and kill innocent people. If we wouldn't have done anything after the attacks of 9-11 the terrorists would have won and in 20 years they would still be winning, but now since President Bush made the brave decision to send our troops over to Iraq the war on Terrorism is getting fought now. Wouldn't you rather root out all evil in America today, or would you rather have your kids deal with it in 20 years when terror groups would have even more power. President Bush did the right thing in my mind by going into Iraq and rooting out terrorists. I am 18 years old, and after Graduation I am joining the Air Force. I am joining because I love my country and I want to make America and the world a better place so my children don't have to live through some of the things we had to.


----------



## Militant_Tiger (Feb 23, 2004)

Hey peters thats cool, putting things in the quotes that I never said. I was worried that I may have flip flopped until I read the part about joining the military. I have never had any plans to join the service.


----------



## aupeters (Jun 29, 2004)

Ya thats my quote not yours. Your quote was the one above mine sayin that we have no business in Iraq. Still gettin used to this website not a pro yet like you.


----------



## aupeters (Jun 29, 2004)

But everyone is entitled to their own opinions, thats what makes America great.


----------



## Militant_Tiger (Feb 23, 2004)

I see, I thought you were trying to put words in my mouth. 9/11 was bad, we went into afghanistan and whooped some ***. We are now in Iraq, who had nothing to do with 9/11. You are trying to draw a line between two unrelated things.


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

Looks like Delay dodged a bullet

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/11/ ... 6960.shtml

Sounds to me like he was aware of it though :eyeroll:

They're all crooks


----------

