One difference between Tom DeLay and Terri Schiavo is that she didn’t do anything to deserve what’s happened to her. He may not deserve this, but he’s earned a swift kick in the ass at minimum.
Again…let them do something that benefits every American and I’d be satisfied.
Do I think I will ever be satisfied?
No.
Is he a reptile or a zombie? Inquring minds want to know!
I’m just asking being I’ve never heard of an zombie reptile before…
According to this site, there be such critters (scroll way down):
Well, not only am I not a “fan” of his, there’s little to debate with you when it comes to Republicans. Did you happen to notice in the quote you offered that he was at a fund-raiser and “drew parallels” between them with the obvious (to anyone else) allusion to the House GOP to step up and defend him the same way?
It almost sounds like he’s pissed that the GOP isn’t doing everything they can to defend him. But of course that wouldn’t satisfy you either as it would be Republicans leaving him to hang.
Find a hobby. This obssession of yours is kind of disturbing. 
Well, I certainly wasn’t excusing DeLay’s conduct here. I explicitly said I wished he hadn’t done it, which isn’t in any way an excuse.
It should also come as no surprise that some of the proposals you believe I should call the Republicans on, I might not wish to do so, as I might actually be in agreement with them.
After all, I am a Republican.
This may seem pretty obvious, Hentor but you’re one of those posters least inclined to ascribe a disagreement to an honest difference of opinion and more inclined to assign it to more devious motives like greed, bigotry and racism. So it becomes necessary at times to spell this out.
Mr. Moto, not that it matters much, but I lump you in with the conservatives I like to talk with. You’re honest and ethical and thoughtful, and while we disagree on many issues, I’ve got a lot of respect for where you come from.
So I wouldn’t lump you in with the “et al” at all.
duffer, good on ya for not defending De Lay here, and I mean it!
Daniel
Said the silly, abused, deluded girlfriend: Sure he lies to me, cheats on me, and beats me. But I love him!
-Joe
Any pitting of DeLay over the Schiavo case would be incomplete without reference to this loathsome editorial he contributed to USA Today.
DeLay (whose expertise, as the newspaper acidly noted, is in the field of pest control) is trying to suggest that medical opinion is equally divided between those that think Schiavo is in a persistent vegetative state and others who believe that with proper rehab, she could run for a Congressional seat from Texas.
The best part is where he waxes indignant about her being kept from going out and enjoying the fresh air. Yep, if it weren’t for her husband and those nasty people at the hospice, she’d be doing wheelies in the courtyard.
Using this case to try to make people forget about his ethical failings is a new low, even for DeLay.
Well, given the examples of Texas congressmen we’ve been seeing lately, even in her present condition she’d probably be able to do about as well…
Well, I was responding more or less to your statement:
I take this to be a rebuke of Reeder in which you are trying to assert that you are a more independent thinker than he might have implied, which can be judged by your calling your leaders on a particular failing. I am suggesting that if you are calling Delay on his behavior here, it doesn’t really come across. It seems more like “praise by faint damnation” if such a thing exists. If you don’t have an emotional and reflexive support of your leaders, why can’t you clearly say - “Hey, this is wrong” instead of “Gee, I wish he said what he said in a different way” or “I wish he hadn’t done it.” Something is holding back your criticism of the right.
You are qualitatively different than duffer or Starving Artist or Brutus, no doubt, but then again it was you who attached yourself to the et al., not anyone else.
Or without; just the way he has lived.
Oh, yes there is.
I just wanted to add that there may be some validity to this charge. I may in fact assume baser motives than are always warranted. I will try to check this in the future.
I look forward to our future debates with renewed enthusiasm.
Whenever I think these guys have hit rock bottom, they get out jackhammers and start digging.
In this instance, I think DeLay may be onto something. His situation is remarkably similar to Terri Schiavo’s in one critical aspect. After all, we’re a nation of laws, and what DeLay is upset about is that the law has been applied to Mrs. Schiavo’s case (resulting in an outcome with which he disagrees), and that the law is being applied to his situation (with a likely outcome that will not please him). So I, for one, hope DeLay’s right: I hope the rule of law will be applied to his fundraising activities as much as it has been to Mrs. Schiavo’s right to self-determination.
It’s a shame that too many people, on both sides of the aisle, are quick to ignore the rule of law when it renders an outcome that isn’t to their liking.
Yesterday, after hearing yet another power-suited troglodyte wax indignant about out-of-the-mainstream judges imposing their will on a helpless public, it suddenly struck me that in many ways the rule of law itself is out of the mainstream.
I found myself equally pleased and saddened by the insight.
Errr…and the democrats satisfy this impossibly high standard how, exactly?