Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

News We are witnessing the criminalization of conservative politics

  1. Oct 28, 2005 #1

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    "We are witnessing the criminalization of conservative politics"


    Gee, and I thought that people like DeLay and Rove claim criminal activity as politics.
  2. jcsd
  3. Oct 28, 2005 #2
    Now, now, Ivan, you know they are just victims of the VAST LEFT WING CONSPIRACY!!!:rofl:
  4. Oct 28, 2005 #3
    1) "So many minority youths had volunteered that there was literally no room for patriotic folks like myself." --Tom DeLay, explaining at the 1988 GOP convention why he and vice presidential nominee Dan Quayle did not fight in the Vietnam War

    2) "Now tell me the truth boys, is this kind of fun?" -Tom Delay, to three young hurricane evacuees from New Orleans at the Astrodome in Houston, Sept. 9, 2005

    3) "I AM the federal government." -Tom DeLay, to the owner of Ruth's Chris Steak House, after being told to put out his cigar because of federal government regulations banning smoking in the building, May 14, 2003

    4) "We're no longer a superpower. We're a super-duper power." -Tom DeLay, explaining why America must topple Saddam Hussein in 2002 interview with Fox News

    5) "Nothing is more important in the face of a war than cutting taxes." -Tom DeLay, March 12, 2003

    6) "Guns have little or nothing to do with juvenile violence. The causes of youth violence are working parents who put their kids into daycare, the teaching of evolution in the schools, and working mothers who take birth control pills." -Tom DeLay, on causes of the Columbine High School massacre, 1999

    7) "A woman can take care of the family. It takes a man to provide structure. To provide stability. Not that a woman can't provide stability, I'm not saying that... It does take a father, though." -Tom DeLay, in a radio interview, Feb. 10, 2004

    8) "I don't believe there is a separation of church and state. I think the Constitution is very clear. The only separation is that there will not be a government church." -Tom DeLay

    9) "Emotional appeals about working families trying to get by on $4.25 an hour [the minimum wage in 1996] are hard to resist. Fortunately, such families do not exist." -Tom DeLay, during a debate in Congress on increasing the minimum wage, April 23, 1996

    10) "I am not a federal employee. I am a constitutional officer. My job is the Constitution of the United States, I am not a government employee. I am in the Constitution." -Tom DeLay, in a CNN interview, Dec. 19, 1995
  5. Oct 28, 2005 #4
    Nr. 6 alone should be reason enough to put this man away.
  6. Oct 29, 2005 #5


    User Avatar
    Homework Helper

    11) A man is innocent until proven guilty?
  7. Oct 29, 2005 #6
    No, he did not say that anywhere.:smile:
  8. Oct 29, 2005 #7
    To say that "teaching of evolution" is the cause of juvenile violence is not a crime. But I'm not even going to try to argue on this and let it stand in all it's absurd glory for intelligent people to understand the level of this man. I'm just saying that in a decent country people like this would be seriously questioned and probably found unfit for office.
  9. Oct 29, 2005 #8
    So DeLay is saying that...

    conservative politics = money laundering + campaign fraud.

    Finally, he starts being honest.
  10. Oct 29, 2005 #9


    User Avatar
    Homework Helper

    Actually, I was merely suggesting it. I don't remember just at the moment who said it first.

    Sorry for the confusion.
  11. Oct 29, 2005 #10
    Actually, in reference to the title of this thread.

    We have witnessed the criminalization of Conservative politics for years.

    What they are doing now in light of the flagging support is just going back and gathering evidence.

    When one gets into trouble, the rest of the conservatives say some nice words and then cut and put distance between them.

    I honestly can't understand the thread title when Enron happened years ago proving the premise to those of us who you have been pointing out as treasonous for years.

    Basically we have quotes of Libby and Rove outing Plame and now they are going through the definition of 'it' that Clinton went through.

    Dear Republicans ... they did it ... they both named Plame as a CIA agent while they were in office.

    She is now no longer able to serve in that capacity.

    Had she been in a foreign country at the time, her life would have been in danger as a spy which carries the penalty of death in some nations.

    Got it yet?

    Did they mean to do it?

    Somebody on Fox brought up tha analogy of hitting the batter in baseball ... Did they intend to hit her or slip on the mound.

    Are you saying the 'boy genius' is a f'in idot in reality and just looks smart beside Bush?

    So which government employee with a security clearence doesn't know you don't name agents of the CIA to reporters ... anybody ... anybody ... Beuler??? :uhh:
  12. Oct 29, 2005 #11


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    Now, polyb, you know the dims haven't quite caught up with the pubs so their conspiracy is only half vast! ;)
  13. Oct 29, 2005 #12


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    Ah, the key difference between Bush's:

    Sep 30,2003 statement about the leak, " ... I don't know of anybody in my administration who leaked classified information. If somebody did leak classified information, I'd like to know it, and we'll take the appropriate action."

    and his:

    June 18, 2005 statement, "If someone committed a crime, they will no longer work in my administration."

    The first is a statement that Bush will tolerate neither criminal behavior nor incompetence. The second is a revision to that policy - he'll accept a leak of classified information due to incompetence, but not due to criminal activity.

    You don't need 'beyond a reasonable doubt' and a detailed analysis of the technical aspects of the law to figure out Libby and Rove both divulged information that is potentially damaging to the US national security (we'll probably never know the actual impact of the leak, since the impact would be classified, as well.) The decision on whether they should remain in the administration shouldn't depend solely on 'guilty of criminal behavior'.

    How have they managed to be a functional part of the administration throughout this investigation, anyway. Normally, a security clearance would be suspended until the investigation showed the person didn't distribute classified information. You wouldn't fire a person while the investigation is going on, but the person certainly wouldn't be given access to even more classified information while he's being investigated.
    Last edited: Oct 29, 2005
  14. Oct 29, 2005 #13
    Yes, this is silly. The ex-governor of New Jersey, Christine Todd Whitman (R), responded on NOW last night that the description is ridiculous. We are seeing a few people investigated who may have been involved in some very serious crimes.

    This isn't rocket science, we simply want the criminals out of government. It isn't a conspiracy. :rolleyes:
  15. Oct 29, 2005 #14


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor

    That's funny coming from DeLay, who has engaged in that behavior himself. The look at what the Bush campaign did to John McCain in South Carolina - and ostensibly, he is a 'fellow' Republican.
  16. Oct 29, 2005 #15
    Well hell, why not. Liberal ideas fall flat on there ass at the ballot box, the Democrats are failing to get any traction with their agenda. What the heck is their agenda anyway, oh yeah that’s right, stop Bush at all cost. So, it’s plain to see if you can’t beat them at the ballot box indictment them.
  17. Oct 29, 2005 #16
    You mean like.... positive momentum in some parts of the country towards recognizing gay marriage?



    Preventing the privatisation of Social Security?

    http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-102705assess_lat,0,5552535.story?coll=la-home-headlines [Broken] (see near bottom or google for more)

    Fair wages for workers in New Orleans?

    (same link as above, near bottom)

    Humane treatment of prisoners?


    Increasing pro-environmental sentiment?

    http://www.ci.seattle.wa.us/mayor/climate/ [Broken]

    Many of these are bipartisan (except, possibly, #1). They are largely moderate issues, but they are part and parcel of the Democratic "agenda."

    Why do you say democrats are failing to get any traction on their agenda? they've been very effective at finding republican support for many key issues. That looks like traction, to me!

    Thanks for any specifics you can share. I appreciate it.
    Last edited by a moderator: May 2, 2017
  18. Oct 29, 2005 #17
    They criminalize themselves:
    http://movies.crooksandliars.com/TDS-Trent-Lott-m.mov [Broken]
    Last edited by a moderator: May 2, 2017
  19. Oct 29, 2005 #18


    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Regarding juvenile crime, he should have said: "I am not a role model."

    Wow, there are conservatives still defending him. I thought they were all busy planning the nuclear option and working on Rice's campaign for 2008?
  20. Oct 29, 2005 #19
    Let me just respond to your points.
    Ok, you mentioned Gay Marriage. Every time a bill comes up for a vote it is rejected by a super majority. However, the courts are more than happy to rule such initiative as unconstitutional.
    "Preventing the privatisation of Social Security?" – Here’s an example of obstructionism. Instead of trying to fix a broken system they just get in the way. Privatization is a good idea, but instead of saying "hey, we got a better one!" Dems just try and stop it.
    Fair wages for workers in New Orleans? - Please, I don’t see fair wages as a Democratic issue. Everyone deserves to be paid a prevailing wage. I didn’t see the president trying to prevent that one.
    "Humane treatment of prisoners?" - Once again an issue advanced through the courts.
    "Increasing pro-environmental sentiment?" - Junk science, and fear mongering. The earth has frozen and defrosted several times already. BTW this was long before the SUV came along.
    In summery, the Democratic traction consists of… Winning through judicial fiat, scaring their people into supporting there ideas, and obstruction the republicans at all costs.
  21. Oct 29, 2005 #20
    First of all, Patrick Fitzgerald is not a Democrat. Secondly, Ronnie Earle may be a Democrat, but he has gone after just as many Democrats as Republicans (himself included: look it up).
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook