April 15, 2005

Tom DeLay...Crook or Typical Senator?

There's been a lot of brouhaha lately about Senate Majority Leader Tom DeLay and what's being called his "unethical behavior." Democrats are on the warpath, demanding that DeLay step down because of having family on the campaign payroll and going on junkets (trips to exotic or exciting locales on someone else's dime).

The question is, of course, did Tom DeLay do anything that is against Senate rules? And as the question is discussed, will DeLay get the chance to defend his actions, or will he be found guilty without a "trial?"

Two prominent conservative pundits take on this very serious question. David Limbaugh looks at it from the viewpoint that DeLay is guilty simply by "virtue of his ideology:"

In their [Democrats'] view, conservatives -- especially ones who believe in their principles with every fiber of their being and, worse, are effective at advancing the right-wing policy agenda -- are already evil. To discover ethical or legal infractions by such people is merely confirmation of what is already true in nature -- conservatives are guilty: of religious zealotry, favoring the rich, exploiting the poor, racism, sexism, homophobia and xenophobia. (And DeLay is even worse than most evil conservatives, because he is arrogant, meaning he is not intimidated by their liberal "Highnesses.")

Indeed, it's easy to find fault with someone whose very existence is the proverbial thorn in your side. For example, teachers will often blame misdeeds on the class cutup, even if they didn't actually see him do it, for they feel he's the most likely culprit because of how they've come to view him.

Limbaugh doesn't believe that we should just close our eyes to the possibility, however:

If he has done something that warrants his expulsion, he should resign -- regardless of whether the whole lot of his detractors are guilty as sin.

In other words, it's not okay if he engaged in unethical behavior "because all the other guys are doing it too." The problem here, however, stems from Democrats (Charlie Rangel, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, to name a few) being a bit too eager to nail DeLay to the wall because by doing so, they'll take out one of their most powerful opponents.

Michael Reagan also takes on the DeLay question, but looks at it with regard to hypocrisy and double standards:

House Democrats have mounted an attack on Majority Leader Tom DeLay, accusing him of having his wife and daughter on his campaign payroll. They donÕt bother to tell you that Sen. Joe LiebermanÕs son Matthew received about $34,000 and daughter Rebecca about $36,000 for working on his 2004 presidential campaign, or that California Democrat Rep. Fortney "Pete" StarkÕs wife Deborah earns $2,400 a month for serving as campaign consultant, or that Rep. Bart StupakÕs wife Laurie earned about $36,000 annually the past two years as the finance director for her husband's campaign.

They attack DeLay for going on junkets, but remain mum when it comes to Democrats. Take liberal Democrat Maurice Hinchey, who according to the New York Daily News took 27 trips costing private groups $157,000 over the past five years. He traveled in style; luxuriating at resorts like the Four Seasons in Punta Mita and other sumptuous retreats in Morocco, Madrid, Budapest, Helsinki, Tunisia, Cancun, Italy, Vancouver, Shanghai and Grand Cayman Island.

Perhaps the thinking is that the American public will only look at the information they're providing and not do any further digging. Or perhaps because DeLay is the majority leader he is more accountable than the others in the Senate? These are just a few of the examples Reagan offers.

Limbaugh clinches the argument with the following:

He [DeLay] can hardly be crucified for paying family members from campaign funds for legitimate work they performed when House rules expressly authorize he practice -- because it is permitted by congressional regulations. He can hardly be cashiered for a trip to Moscow paid for by the National Center for Public Policy Research, not Russian companies. He can hardly be faulted for a trip to South Korea funded by an organization that had only very recently registered as a foreign agent, unbeknownst to DeLay. And he can't be removed because a liberal, politically charged prosecutor indicted three of his former associates, especially when DeLay himself hasn't been implicated in the case.

But no matter. Democrats will just keep throwing charges against the wall until something sticks, because this is ultimately about power and thwarting the conservative agenda.

Buh-dee-buh-dee-buh-dee-buh-dee-buh, th-that's all, folks!

Show Comments »