Bush Supports DeLay the Crook

Post by **Relbeek Einre** » Fri Mar 18, 2005 8:53 am

Sorry, Embar, you're a snob. It's true.

Partha: I'm guessing "No."

Rsak · Post by **Rsak** » Fri Mar 18, 2005 9:40 am

You would be incorrect Relbeek. I have seen those districts as drawn in the 90s and after the recent redistricting.

How they are drawn does not answer the question of whether the goal of De Lay was crooked in nature or not.

Post by **Relbeek Einre** » Fri Mar 18, 2005 9:57 am

How they are drawn does not answer the question of whether the goal of De Lay was crooked in nature or not.

Rsak · Post by **Rsak** » Fri Mar 18, 2005 11:00 am

Why are you shocked?

The statement is completely accurate.

Embar Angylwrath · Post by **Embar Angylwrath** » Fri Mar 18, 2005 11:12 am

Gerrymandering is only crooked if the Republicans do it. If the Democrats do it, we call it Equitable Redistricting.

Post by **Relbeek Einre** » Fri Mar 18, 2005 11:48 am

Ah, the "They do it too" defense - the hue and cry of defending the indefensible.

And not true, too. The type of gerrymandering DeLay pulled is almost unprecedented.

Kulaf · Post by **Kulaf** » Fri Mar 18, 2005 12:11 pm

"Ah, the "They do it too" defense - the hue and cry of defending the indefensible."

Ya know.......it would almost be worth it to see a Dem in the White House just to put the shoe on the other foot so to speak. It must be ever so comforting to always be in attack dog mode.

Embar Angylwrath · Post by **Embar Angylwrath** » Fri Mar 18, 2005 12:27 pm

Relbeek Einre wrote:Ah, the "They do it too" defense - the hue and cry of defending the indefensible.

And not true, too. The type of gerrymandering DeLay pulled is almost unprecedented.

Meaning he was the most creative and bold in doing something that is perfectly legal. Aesop and sour grapes come to mind.

Post by **Relbeek Einre** » Fri Mar 18, 2005 2:09 pm

Legal, but a breach of the public trust.

Another thing worthy of note: Last year the House Ethics Committee admonished DeLay for three ethics violations.

The republicans on the committee who voted to admonish DeLay have since been replaced. The replacements have all donated to DeLay's legal defense fund.

Blatant conflict of interest, also completely unprecedented.

Rsak · Post by **Rsak** » Fri Mar 18, 2005 2:39 pm

All of which is no worse then what Clinton did while he was in office yet you do not call him a crook.

Expecting any kind of consistency from your outcries would be like waiting for hell to freeze over.

Kulaf · Post by **Kulaf** » Fri Mar 18, 2005 3:04 pm

*waits for the obligatory......they did it too, statement*

Post by **Relbeek Einre** » Fri Mar 18, 2005 3:06 pm

All of which is no worse then what Clinton did while he was in office yet you do not call him a crook.

Actually, I do call Clinton a crook, Waterhead. And no, it's actually far worse.

Rsak · Post by **Rsak** » Fri Mar 18, 2005 5:07 pm

Funny I have not seen the same verocity that you have in calling DeLay a crook.

You claim it is far worse yet what DeLay has done is not illegal, but specifically directed to be performed by the state legislature. You also ignore the fact that DeLay does not have the power in the situation and he could not do anything without the assistance of many lawmakers in the state of texas. While DeLay may be the instigator in the affair he is not the one who made the final decision and your ire, none of which is legitimate, belongs to the reupblician congress of the state of texas. You sir have no jurisdiction to complain about the matter since you are not a reisdent of texas.

However go ahead an exercise your free speech while you show what a bigotted ass you are.

Embar Angylwrath · Post by **Embar Angylwrath** » Fri Mar 18, 2005 5:10 pm

See Beek.. this is why you don't argue with a chimp. He just gave you an ass-bleeding checkmate. Even chimps get lucky.

And yes.... I told you so.

Post by **Relbeek Einre** » Fri Mar 18, 2005 5:44 pm

Funny I have not seen the same verocity[sic] that you have in calling DeLay a crook.

Please, Embar. This one's easy.

Chimp, I don't comment on every crook. I think Nixon and LBJ were worse crooks than either of them, but I've barely mentioned either. I think Joe McCarthy was worse than those two, but I don't talk about that either.

Why? BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT IN OFFICE.

Jesus, man, get a fucking grip. This is about current events, not history.

Rsak · Post by **Rsak** » Fri Mar 18, 2005 6:35 pm

This is about current events, not history.

Actually I think it has more to do with your panties being in a wad since you are not effected one bit with the deed that the Republician congress committed not DeLay.

SabiarofErudin · Post by **SabiarofErudin** » Sat Mar 19, 2005 9:56 am

For my own sanity can we please stop making refrences to Relbeek wearing panties?