In the end, DeLay seems awfully worried about Democrats

April 4, 2006

I finally watched [tag]Tom DeLay[/tag]’s official resignation announcement and saw how much DeLay struggled to smile as if today were a crowning achievement of his political career, instead of the day that saw him give up and run away to prepare his pending legal defense.

Reading over the [tag]transcript[/tag], DeLay clearly wanted desperately to strike a positive tone. He mentioned being “optimistic,” and mentioned how “excited” he is about his future.

But I couldn’t help but notice that the one topic DeLay really wanted to talk about wasn’t his record or accomplishments; it’s the Democrats.

“Because I care so deeply about this district and the people in it, I refuse to allow liberal Democrats an opportunity to steal this seat with a negative, personal campaign. […]

“As difficult as this decision has been for me, it’s not going to be a great day for liberal [tag]Democrats[/tag], either. […]

“Having served under Republican and Democrat control in the House, I know first hand how important it is for Republicans to maintain their national majority. A Democrat Congress in 2007 would, without doubt or remorse, raise hundreds of billions of dollars in taxes, summarily cut and run from the war on terror, and immediately initiate an unconstitutional impeachment of President Bush.”

On Fox News this morning, [tag]DeLay[/tag] was at it again.

“My liberal Democrat opponent has been raising money all over the nation. He’s got Barbra Streisand’s support, George Soros’ support, Nancy Pelosi’s support. […]

“Oh, boy, I tell you, this is a Democrat Party that has no agenda, can’t come up with an agenda, has no solution. All they’ve got is the strategy of personal destruction and character assassination. And it hasn’t worked in the past, it’s not going to work in the future. They are a permanent minority party.”

For a minority party that has nothing to offer, DeLay seems awfully worried about those mean ol’ Dems.

DeLay’s just worrying that the Democrats will steal his playbook (“…the strategy of personal destruction and character assassination.”) to get back into power 😉

  • And the swiftboat liars didn’t practice a strategy of personal destruction and character assassination? I will never understand how DeLay and his crime syndicate partners can possibly believe that they represent the moral high ground….in anything!

  • Curmudgeon: Exactly. Here’s a guy who not only earned but took pride in his reputation as “the Hammer!” Sounds more like a mob hitman than anyone with principles.

  • “The strategy of personal destruction and character assassination?” Now there’s a fine example of the pot calling the kettle black! All this doofus is worried about right now is that his “financial windfalls” from K Street will dry up, once the GOP returns to its well-earned status of “minority party.” As for “Faux News,” I’m imagining what their FOX logo would look like with eagle’s wings on either side…and a nice little swastika in the middle of that great big “O….”

  • scum bag that he is …

    Don’t you wonder if he quit congress to cut a deal? If he quits congress and rolls over on his “esteemed colleagues” they might just let him out after a year or two in “Club Fed”. His chief of staff cut a deal last week. There are smoking guns in his hand.

    Perhaps all of the “liberals must be stopped” is just smoke and mirrors while he chats up the prosecutor. Surly no one thinks he has scruples.

    We can always hope.

  • Character assasination? …Bullshit. The Republicans are their own party of character suicide. Delay made his own bed of corruption and and now has to lie in it. The bad news is Tom’s only two years away from joining K Street … just what this nation needs.

  • “A Democrat Congress in 2007 would, without doubt or remorse, raise hundreds of billions of dollars in taxes,

    Somebody‘s got to get Bush’s monster deficits under control.

    summarily cut and run from the war on terror,

    Iraq has nothing to do with the so-called War on Terrorâ„¢. Murtha is right, we need to redeploy.

    and immediately initiate an unconstitutional impeachment of President Bush.”

    This is supposed to be a bad thing? And what’s so “unconstitutional” about it? The Constitution provides for impeachment of the President for high crimes and misdemeanors. Surely Bush and Cheney are guilty of this, if Clinton ever was.

    On Fox News this morning, DeLay was at it again.

    “My liberal Democrat opponent has been raising money all over the nation. He’s got Barbra Streisand’s support, George Soros’ support, Nancy Pelosi’s support. […]

    I’ll never understand the Repugnants’ fixation over Babs. I mean, Yentl was pretty bad, but still…

  • My god — I think I finally realized Rove’s true genius with his “30-year/permanent GOP majority” plan: it’s right there in DeLay’s formulation of the Dems as the “permanent minority party.” It not only reinforces GOP = winners, Dems = losers, it also reinforces GOP = white folks, Dems = swarthy evildoers.

  • DeLay should be punished to the full extent of the law, serve maximum time in jail, and fined to the point of being made penniless or close enough to it. Maybe then, he and his associates in crime would learn to respect and obey the law henceforth.

    What’s unconstitutional about a constitutionally mandated presidential impeachment for high crimes and misdemeanors, if it comes to that? Do Bush’s Republican cohorts really believe anything they do is “constitutional,” however unconstitutional their actions really are? Does the U.S. Constitution have a clause permitting Republicans to commit certain crimes but not permitting the Democrats or their “significant others” to do the same?

    As I learned in public school what seems eons ago, the U.S. Constitution applies to all citizens equally not unequally to this day, or have the Republicans amended the Constitution secretly to permit unequal treatment based on their own secret criteria? If so, that is one more reason that we and our fellow Americans should vote deserving Republicans out and Democrats in during the coming ’06 and ’08 elections
    –to restore democracy to our shores.

  • Bravo Scott. You nailed it.

    And what’s with Bugman’s choice of booogah-boogah SCARY monsters: WOMEN AND JEWS! THE HORROR! Doesn’t that seem weird? He’s heroically fighting to protect us all from Jews, women, and (for full effect) a Jewish woman.

    Also note how he’s already telegraphing the Cheney administration’s response to the “unconstitutional” Articles of Impeachment and convictions which will be issued in 2007: they plan to get it thrown out by the new Roberts/Scalito court.

    • Comments are closed.