View Full Version : ..and now a message from Republican House Majority Leader, Tom Delay
Busyman
10-02-2005, 10:48 PM
Sorry I meant former Republican House Majority Leader, Tom Delay.
Dear Friend,
As you probably know, the very partisan Travis County D.A. recently manufactured an indictment against me that is based on charges from the 2002 Texas State House elections.
These charges are groundless and false. I am completely innocent.
Just as Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison and other public officials have defeated similar attacks from this D.A., I will prove his allegations are baseless and without merit.
Despite this partisan distraction, I will continue to represent you and fight for the interests of our community.
I hope you’ll take a moment now to read more about exactly what is happening and why. Thank you for visiting and I look forward to keeping you up to date on our fight this out of control DA.
We are pullin' for ya man. ;)
GepperRankins
10-02-2005, 10:51 PM
:unsure: sounds like filibuster to me
:unsure: sounds like filibuster to me
lovely word that, very satisfying to say out loud...filibuster, filibuster....:)
Busyman
10-03-2005, 12:53 AM
:unsure: sounds like filibuster to me
lovely word that, very satisfying to say out loud...filibuster, filibuster....:)
Are you a....buster, Sara?
JunkBarMan
10-03-2005, 01:11 AM
More on this story (www.economist.com/agenda/displaystory.cfm?story_id=4462459&fsrc=nwl)
vidcc
10-03-2005, 01:36 AM
http://carapace.weblogs.us/images/Pat%20Oliphant%20rev%20tom%20delay%20po050328.gif
http://www.sourball.com/whitehouse/cp/mugshot.jpg
GepperRankins
10-03-2005, 01:54 AM
2004 planetery year of atheism = oxymoron?
ruthie
10-04-2005, 07:11 AM
A second indictment was handed down today.
A second indictment was handed down today.
Actually two more. Money Laundering and Conspiracy to Launder Money. :(
JPaul
10-04-2005, 12:57 PM
a.k.a did it, tried it.
Busyman
10-04-2005, 01:47 PM
a.k.a did it, tried it.
a.k.a a.k.a b.k.a.
vidcc
10-04-2005, 03:07 PM
Much as I think Delay is an unethical, hypocritical chickenhawk that dwells under damp rocks and is likely to face more serious charges in other investigations I will refrain from pronouncing him guilty or innocent of these charges.
Of course this does not mean that I shall refrain from enjoying the process
Of course this does not mean that I shall refrain from enjoying the process
Me too/either.
It'll go nicely with Harriet Miers' confirmation hearing. ;)
vidcc
10-04-2005, 08:55 PM
It'll go nicely with Harriet Miers' confirmation hearing. ;)
Did you get your E.mail from Ken Mehlman ?
It'll go nicely with Harriet Miers' confirmation hearing. ;)
Did you get your E.mail from Ken Mehlman ?
No, vid; Mehlman gets his e-mail from me. ;)
Busyman
10-04-2005, 10:40 PM
Of course this does not mean that I shall refrain from enjoying the process
Me too/either.
It'll go nicely with Harriet Miers' confirmation hearing. ;)
That's a joke too.
"Hey you've been such good counsel to me that I want you to join the highest court in the land...even though you ain't neva been a judge."
Cronyism once again. Forget the partisan crap, she ain't friggin' qualified.
SDRAWKCABSSA :wacko:
Me too/either.
It'll go nicely with Harriet Miers' confirmation hearing. ;)
That's a joke too.
"Hey you've been such good counsel to me that I want you to join the highest court in the land...even though you ain't neva been a judge."
Cronyism once again. Forget the partisan crap, she ain't friggin' qualified.
SDRAWKCABSSA :wacko:
Forget the cronyism-what's qualified?
Rehnquist had never been a judge either, B.
As to his reasons for nominating her?
IT'S HIS CHOICE.
If she's not qualified, let the Senate vote her down, right?
If she's not qualified, they'll dope things out, right?
If he's an asshole for nominating her, and she's an asshole because she's worked with/for him, I think you can trust the Democrats to let you know.. all you'll have to do is listen for the noise. ;)
vidcc
10-05-2005, 12:52 AM
what's qualified?
For republicans one that will overturn Roe...for Democrats one that will uphold it.... All the other chit chat is just the hot stuff that come out of the rear of a bovine..
As to his reasons for nominating her?
IT'S HIS CHOICE.
If she's not qualified, let the Senate vote her down, right?
If she's not qualified, they'll dope things out, right?
I am wondering on what they can base the decision on. Bush says her White house work qualifies her...yet I doubt he will release any meaningful documents to back this up, we just have to "trust him" (so it's a faith based process)
Also I am assuming that the republicans that said asking about Roe is off limits for Roberts will hold the same standard for this candidate so the right wingers will have that warm cosy feeling too.
If he's an asshole for nominating her, and she's an asshole because she's worked with/for him, I think you can trust the Democrats to let you know.. all you'll have to do is listen for the noise. ;)
Quite the opposite seems the case (http://www.factcheck.org/article351.html) :rolleyes:
For republicans one that will overturn Roe...for Democrats one that will uphold it.... All the other chit chat is just the hot stuff that come out of the rear of a bovine..
Cow farts? :huh:
As to his reasons for nominating her?
IT'S HIS CHOICE.
If she's not qualified, let the Senate vote her down, right?
If she's not qualified, they'll dope things out, right?
I am wondering on what they can base the decision on. Bush says her White house work qualifies her...yet I doubt he will release any meaningful documents to back this up, we just have to "trust him" (so it's a faith based process)
Also I am assuming that the republicans that said asking about Roe is off limits for Roberts will hold the same standard for this candidate so the right wingers will have that warm cosy feeling too.
If he's an asshole for nominating her, and she's an asshole because she's worked with/for him, I think you can trust the Democrats to let you know.. all you'll have to do is listen for the noise. ;)
Quite the opposite seems the case (http://www.factcheck.org/article351.html) :rolleyes:
OMG-The Republicans are attempting to commit Democrat politics... :O
vidcc
10-05-2005, 01:25 AM
OMG-The Republicans are attempting to commit Democrat politics... :O
For Ken Mehlman part, his homosexuality probably explains it ;)
For Ken Mehlman part, his homosexuality probably explains it ;)
I never figured you for homophobic...criminal to even mention such things, isn't it?
Though I suppose if you are neither Democrat nor Republican, you are not bound by any of the politically-correct strictures of the left, nor the rhetorical decency of the right...I thought all the Kerry fans learned their lesson when they couldn't resist running their jibs about Dick Cheney's daughter.
Right or wrong, such talk has a way of backfiring, and for that reason, at least, it would seem best to avoid it, especially when the horse in question has not spoken to the issue.
My opinion, anyway.
vidcc
10-05-2005, 02:17 AM
For Ken Mehlman part, his homosexuality probably explains it ;)
I never figured you for homophobic...criminal to even mention such things, isn't it?
Though I suppose if you are neither Democrat nor Republican, you are not bound by any of the politically-correct strictures of the left, nor the rhetorical decency of the right...I thought all the Kerry fans learned their lesson when they couldn't resist running their jibs about Dick Cheney's daughter.
Right or wrong, such talk has a way of backfiring, and for that reason, at least, it would seem best to avoid it, especially when the horse in question has not spoken to the issue.
My opinion, anyway.
Everyone has to stop pretending that George Bush is macho. Because plainly, he acts like a girl!
Not a woman. A girl! Not a week goes by when John Kerry isn't attacked because he said something that hurt somebody's feelings. According to Bush spokespeople, Kerry lost the first debate because of his new insult to our allies when he said, "The coalition wasn't genuine. You know, Poland had Lithuania over that night for a debate party, and now they can't look at each other without crying."
All of the attacks on John Kerry involve his thoughtless words. Like when he said the Iraqi prime minister wasn't legitimate. The b*tch! He hurt the troops when he said Iraq was the wrong war at the wrong time! MEN! He hurt the Vietnam vets when he called that war a mistake. He is so not sitting with us at lunch anymore!
He's a girl! George Bush is all - "And another thing about John Kerry: he uses Botox! He spends too much time on his hair and he's two-faced. Flip-flopper!" "And I bet John Kerry didn't even deserve any of those medals. I would have gone to stupid old Vietnam, but I wanted to be a stay-at-home soldier!"
Excuse me, this president isn't resolute. He's on the rag. He stopped having press conferences, which is basically saying, "I'm not talking to you!" He acted all crampy at the debate: "It's hard work!" I kept waiting for him to say, "If you don't like how I do your shirts, then iron them yourself!" He even ran for president like a girl, promising to "restore dignity to the Oval Office." What man gives a rat's ass about restoring an office? A real man thinks the Oval Office lost all its integrity the day Monica Lewinsky stopped coming in there to blow the president.
so what's the crime here?
saying ken is light in the step, suggesting that his "gayness" might make him act like a democrat or that democrats act like fags ? :rolleyes:
Busyman
10-05-2005, 03:49 AM
That's a joke too.
"Hey you've been such good counsel to me that I want you to join the highest court in the land...even though you ain't neva been a judge."
Cronyism once again. Forget the partisan crap, she ain't friggin' qualified.
SDRAWKCABSSA :wacko:
Forget the cronyism-what's qualified?
Rehnquist had never been a judge either, B.
As to his reasons for nominating her?
IT'S HIS CHOICE.
If she's not qualified, let the Senate vote her down, right?
If she's not qualified, they'll dope things out, right?
If he's an asshole for nominating her, and she's an asshole because she's worked with/for him, I think you can trust the Democrats to let you know.. all you'll have to do is listen for the noise. ;)
Mmmk. Rehnquist wasn't qualified either.
Actually I haven't heard much noise from the Dems.
I would be very surprised if the Senate votes her down. Repubs seem to have a hive mind these days.
I heard Dick was trying to ease the Repubs by telling them "trust me she's conservative, she's conservative."
As to his reasons...........no shit.
Forget the cronyism-what's qualified?
Rehnquist had never been a judge either, B.
As to his reasons for nominating her?
IT'S HIS CHOICE.
If she's not qualified, let the Senate vote her down, right?
If she's not qualified, they'll dope things out, right?
If he's an asshole for nominating her, and she's an asshole because she's worked with/for him, I think you can trust the Democrats to let you know.. all you'll have to do is listen for the noise. ;)
Mmmk. Rehnquist wasn't qualified either.
Actually I haven't heard much noise from the Dems.
I would be very surprised if the Senate votes her down. Repubs seem to have a hive mind these days.
I heard Dick was trying to ease the Repubs by telling them "trust me she's conservative, she's conservative."
As to his reasons...........no shit.
May as well get used to it, then.
Gee, an Evangelical Christian lady, sitting with the Supremes.
Just think... :rolleyes:
I never figured you for homophobic...criminal to even mention such things, isn't it?
Though I suppose if you are neither Democrat nor Republican, you are not bound by any of the politically-correct strictures of the left, nor the rhetorical decency of the right...I thought all the Kerry fans learned their lesson when they couldn't resist running their jibs about Dick Cheney's daughter.
Right or wrong, such talk has a way of backfiring, and for that reason, at least, it would seem best to avoid it, especially when the horse in question has not spoken to the issue.
My opinion, anyway.
Everyone has to stop pretending that George Bush is macho. Because plainly, he acts like a girl!
Not a woman. A girl! Not a week goes by when John Kerry isn't attacked because he said something that hurt somebody's feelings. According to Bush spokespeople, Kerry lost the first debate because of his new insult to our allies when he said, "The coalition wasn't genuine. You know, Poland had Lithuania over that night for a debate party, and now they can't look at each other without crying."
All of the attacks on John Kerry involve his thoughtless words. Like when he said the Iraqi prime minister wasn't legitimate. The b*tch! He hurt the troops when he said Iraq was the wrong war at the wrong time! MEN! He hurt the Vietnam vets when he called that war a mistake. He is so not sitting with us at lunch anymore!
He's a girl! George Bush is all - "And another thing about John Kerry: he uses Botox! He spends too much time on his hair and he's two-faced. Flip-flopper!" "And I bet John Kerry didn't even deserve any of those medals. I would have gone to stupid old Vietnam, but I wanted to be a stay-at-home soldier!"
Excuse me, this president isn't resolute. He's on the rag. He stopped having press conferences, which is basically saying, "I'm not talking to you!" He acted all crampy at the debate: "It's hard work!" I kept waiting for him to say, "If you don't like how I do your shirts, then iron them yourself!" He even ran for president like a girl, promising to "restore dignity to the Oval Office." What man gives a rat's ass about restoring an office? A real man thinks the Oval Office lost all its integrity the day Monica Lewinsky stopped coming in there to blow the president.
so what's the crime here?
saying ken is light in the step, suggesting that his "gayness" might make him act like a democrat or that democrats act like fags ? :rolleyes:
Well, for starters, until your assertion is confirmed, it is a bit unfair (fairness is important to you, isn't it?) to bandy it about.
I would go so far as to say that if I had ever posted as you have in this thread, I would have been forever tattooed as a typically homophobic Conservative.
Just for starters.
In your case, however, no eyebrows seem to have been raised, and, since you posted these remarks in regard to a Republican (not just any old Republican, either), it is unlikely to gain note from any but yours truly.
Nothing new, there...
vidcc
10-05-2005, 07:53 PM
Gee, an Evangelical Christian lady, sitting with the Supremes.
Just think... :rolleyes:
Has there ever been a non Christian or non believer supreme ? I ask this because of the accusation that the supreme court is hostile to religion or at least Christianity.
Gee, an Evangelical Christian lady, sitting with the Supremes.
Just think... :rolleyes:
Has there ever been a non Christian or non believer supreme ? I ask this because of the accusation that the supreme court is hostile to religion or at least Christianity.
Not sure, but apparently she wears it on her sleeve, although this need not affect her work-product.
vidcc
10-05-2005, 08:52 PM
Well, for starters, until your assertion is confirmed, it is a bit unfair (fairness is important to you, isn't it?) to bandy it about.
Thing is I don't see homosexuality as "immoral" even though it's definitely not a pastime I would partake of. It really doesn't matter if he is or not. If I had said his heterosexuality makes him act like a democrat it would be just as unconfirmed. But seeing as he supports laws that will actively deny equal rights to this group I say tough luck Kenny boy, true or not it's funny as hell and you are fair game.
I am for equality for all consenting adults even if I find their choice distasteful. I have never claimed to be a member of the "politically correct" team.(bunch of wimpy Quiche eaters)
I would go so far as to say that if I had ever posted as you have in this thread, I would have been forever tattooed as a typically homophobic Conservative.
Not by me, probably because I know a little about your views. I do however find it interesting that you used typically homophobic to describe conservatives :Freudian: :lol:
In your case, however, no eyebrows seem to have been raised, and, since you posted these remarks in regard to a Republican (not just any old Republican, either), it is unlikely to gain note from any but yours truly.
Nothing new, there...
I hear John Kerry spends an unnatural time in the bathroom if that will make you feel any better :rolleyes:
vidcc
10-05-2005, 08:57 PM
Not sure, but apparently she wears it on her sleeve, although this need not affect her work-product.
Would you prefer it if it did?
Doesn't matter either way, everyone wants a judge that reflects their own views. All this about the only thing that matters is "are they qualified" is rot.
Thing is I don't see homosexuality as "immoral" even though it's definitely not a pastime I would partake of. It really doesn't matter if he is or not. If I had said his heterosexuality makes him act like a democrat it would be just as unconfirmed. But seeing as he supports laws that will actively deny equal rights to this group I say tough luck Kenny boy, true or not it's funny as hell and you are fair game.
I am for equality for all consenting adults even if I find their choice distasteful. I have never claimed to be a member of the "politically correct" team.(bunch of wimpy Quiche eaters)
I honestly have never heard anybody own up to even the least egregious political-correctness.
The term is always applied with derision, especially by those who practice it the most.
I would go so far as to say that if I had ever posted as you have in this thread, I would have been forever tattooed as a typically homophobic Conservative.
Not by me, probably because I know a little about your views. I do however find it interesting that you used typically homophobic to describe conservatives :Freudian: :lol:
I meant to put that descriptive properly in quotes.
My bad.
In your case, however, no eyebrows seem to have been raised, and, since you posted these remarks in regard to a Republican (not just any old Republican, either), it is unlikely to gain note from any but yours truly.
Nothing new, there...
I hear John Kerry spends an unnatural time in the bathroom if that will make you feel any better :rolleyes:
I've heard something similar, though without the caveat that his "unnatural" activities are practiced anywhere in particular.
He is apparently lacking in inhibition relative to physical location.
Not sure, but apparently she wears it on her sleeve, although this need not affect her work-product.
Would you prefer it if it did?
Doesn't matter either way, everyone wants a judge that reflects their own views. All this about the only thing that matters is "are they qualified" is rot.
A constructionist will be perfectly satisfactory.
None of the rest matters in the least, if that quality evinces.
This is interesting. :)
Don't mind the FOXNEWS link; it's an AP story...
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,171336,00.html
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.