DeLay Conspiracy

| | Comments (0)
I don't know much about the specific charges against DeLay, though the case looks to me a bit flimsy -- even many left-wing and moderate commentators, like Dan Abrams (who is himself a lawyer), are saying so -- as from what I've seen, it looks no laws were even broken.

But I really have only two points to make. First, he is not (yet) guilty. He is only indicted. And it is irresponsible for people like Nancy Pelosi say this is "evidence" of corruption in the Republican Party, and the Democrats have done much of the same things, so even if it is evidence of corruption in the GOP, that isn't exactly an argument in favor of the Democrats.

I won't attack Ronnie Earl. I don't know much about him. But that people are attacking him is why I am in favor of changing the House ethics rules: the rules encourage frivolous indictments for partisan purposes, and it also diminshes good indictments because of suspicions of partisanship. It's a bad rule. Heck, I would be a lot more likely to care about this indictment if that rule didn't exist: it necessarily makes me more skeptical.

I am no fan of Tom DeLay. I don't hate him either. I am not sticking up for him at all, I am sticking up for a sense of justice and fair play: don't assume he is guilty, and change the system to take some of the partisanship and gamesmanship out.

Leave a comment

<pudge/*> (pronounced "PudgeGlob") is thousands of posts over many years by Pudge.

"It is the common fate of the indolent to see their rights become a prey to the active. The condition upon which God hath given liberty to man is eternal vigilance; which condition if he break, servitude is at once the consequence of his crime and the punishment of his guilt."

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by pudge published on September 28, 2005 3:21 PM.

ID Quiz was the previous entry in this site.

Mary Mapes is the next entry in this site.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.