• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Tom DeLay Sentenced To 3 Years In Prison

clownboy said:
Agreed. Going after the politicos is a lot like going after Capone. Takes forever to nail the bastards. Now, in a decade or so maybe they'll finally nab Reid.
Click to expand...

The Capone case was a farce. They nailed him for tax evasion. Come on! There was no justice there.
 
This is a confusing article from OpEdNews.com dated January 3, 2013.


Go to the OP link and click on the 'View Article ' button.

It takes you to this article from the Huffington Post dated 1/10/2011

Tom DeLay Sentenced To 3 Years In Prison


DeLay's money laundering conviction is still on appeal.

There's no doubt Ol' 'Hot Tub Tom' is as guilty as can be, but he may have found a loophole. Will an appeals judge believe that a check is not funds (money) or that it was an oversight in writing the law in the belief that everyone accepts a check as legitimate funds? Stay tuned.

...the crux of DeLay’s argument was that the once powerful ex-lawmaker did not commit money laundering because state law didn’t apply to funds the former congressman was tied to since they were in the form of a check.
[...]
Brian Wice, DeLay’s attorney, told the judges that in 2002, the state’s money laundering law did not include checks in its definition of funds. The law was amended in 2005 to include checks.

DeLay attorneys: Ex-GOP star didn't launder money | Texas Regional News - News for Dallas, Texas - The Dallas Morning News
Click to expand...
 
Mr.Nick said:
Yeah right, progressives think Fox News should be banned.

Oh really? progressives certainly want to ban Free Speech - anything they don't agree with is promptly labeled "hate speech" - If I was wrong then "hate speech" wouldn't even be a phrase now would it? NO that is something progressives invented.
Click to expand...

Jumping from "progressives invented the term hate speech" to "progressives want to ban everything they disagree with" is moronic.


Mr.Nick said:
I'll attempt to make it as simple as possible - progressives have several news outlets to watch - conservatives only have ONE and conservatives make up 50% of the populace. One side gets watered down due to competition and the other has NO competition. Since Fox News has no competition and the other outlets do and factoring in the notion that 50% of the nation is conservative or republican Fox News will be rated higher. It's basic statistics. Well, either that or you're confused on how TV ratings work.
Click to expand...

1) Everyone has several news outlets to watch. Most major media stations are slanted towards laziness and poor research skills, not towards one or another political party. They are, in general, somewhat progressive about social issues, and somewhat conservative on fiscal issues. I suspect that some conservatives (and apparently some libertarians) have a hard time recognizing this fact, because they believe that anything that doesn't support their own belief system must be biased against it.

2) Even given that, Fox has more than enough viewers to seriously outpace not just all of its competitors, but very nearly enough to outpace all of them in the aggregate. If you look up the numbers for January 3rd, for instance (the most recent day I could find), you'll discover that if you add up all of the viewership for CNN, MSNBC and CNBC, you'll get a number roughly equivalent to Fox's number. That's not statistics, its arithmetic, and it blows your specious contention of a progressive controlled media totally out of the water. Unless of course you're confused as to how arithmetic works.


Mr.Nick said:
Oh really? then what the hell are you attempting to do now? progressives are a bunch of Nazi's who believe they can ban whatever they don't like or tax the ideas or substances they don't like into oblivion.
Click to expand...

Ah good. More generalizations. Clearly, of course, if some progressives want to ban happy meals, that must mean that all progressives are a bunch of Nazis. Just like because the westborough baptist church thinks god hates gay people, all christians are homophobes. Excellent reasoning all around.

Mr.Nick said:
Marxism is a social philosophy and socialism is the economic model the philosophy exists under. Both are the same because both ideas are joined at the hip. WOW socioeconomics!
Click to expand...

Much like with the fairness doctrine, you very clearly have no idea what you're talking about. Marxism and socialism are distinct political doctrines with substantively different meanings. I suggest you do some research on the subject before commenting on it. Wow, education!
 
Dittohead not! said:
No, I think the argument was about who gets picked on the most because of its crooks. you know, "Hey, sure, that R was a crook, but were he a Democrat, he'd have gotten away with being a crook. "

Political parties, bah, humbug!
Click to expand...

Yes, I see the whinning you rightly pointed out earlier. But wouldn't the real question be not who's picked on, but whether Delay was guilty or not? If he's guilty, stop whinning. Wave bye as he goes to jail.
 
Boo Radley said:
Yes, I see the whinning you rightly pointed out earlier. But wouldn't the real question be not who's picked on, but whether Delay was guilty or not? If he's guilty, stop whinning. Wave bye as he goes to jail.
Click to expand...

That would be the real question of course. How often do the real questions get addressed in politics, though?
 
Boo Radley said:
Not often enough, that's for damn sure!
Click to expand...

God help us if those caught in the ivory tower become our overseer's of what is, or what is not worthy.

For the record, if the charges stand on appeal, then I will be the first to say 'good, another law breaker gone.' And as a person who has defended DeLay in the past you should appreciate that. But as someone already pointed out, this is from an old article, and the case is still out on appeal, so the dancing on his grave is a bit premature.
 
j-mac said:
God help us if those caught in the ivory tower become our overseer's of what is, or what is not worthy.

For the record, if the charges stand on appeal, then I will be the first to say 'good, another law breaker gone.' And as a person who has defended DeLay in the past you should appreciate that. But as someone already pointed out, this is from an old article, and the case is still out on appeal, so the dancing on his grave is a bit premature.
Click to expand...

I don't believe I've danced on his grave. But despite the fact you think asking he relevant questions is somehow ivory tower, I do stand by the notion that whether he is guilty or not is the only important question.
 
Boo Radley said:
I don't believe I've danced on his grave.
Click to expand...

The earlier postings by others in this thread that you "liked" speak differently, or at the very least could be interpreted that way.

But despite the fact you think asking he relevant questions is somehow ivory tower...
Click to expand...

True enough about it being my opinion on the academic french kissing you and ditto are doing here, but the question of relevance is one of pure opinion, yours. The only "relevant" question here is guilt of breaking a law, and that is not settled.

I do stand by the notion that whether he is guilty or not is the only important question.
Click to expand...

As do I.
 
j-mac said:
The earlier postings by others in this thread that you "liked" speak differently, or at the very least could be interpreted that way.



True enough about it being my opinion on the academic french kissing you and ditto are doing here, but the question of relevance is one of pure opinion, yours. The only "relevant" question here is guilt of breaking a law, and that is not settled.



As do I.
Click to expand...

You should really visit the ivory tower, just so you'd know what it really is.

But you might read more carefully what I liked. Mostly things speaking to those who whine about the media or who support justice overall.
 
Boo Radley said:
You should really visit the ivory tower, just so you'd know what it really is.

But you might read more carefully what I liked. Mostly things speaking to those who whine about the media or who support justice overall.
Click to expand...

Well, maybe I read too much agenda into some of those postings, but tell me, do you think that there are those in this thread that don't support justice? Or, that want someone to get away with breaking the law simply because they are on their own ideological "side"? If so please explain.
 
j-mac said:
Well, maybe I read too much agenda into some of those postings, but tell me, do you think that there are those in this thread that don't support justice? Or, that want someone to get away with breaking the law simply because they are on their own ideological "side"? If so please explain.
Click to expand...

I think both sides have a FEW of those people, but not enough to worry about. I do think that the entire "liberal media" effort is mostly excuse making. It has been a successful effort by republicans that plays well.
 
poweRob said:
About ****ing time. With regards to justice, Tom sure as hell lived up to his last name.

Tom DeLay Sentenced To 3 Years In Prison

Former U.S. House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, once considered among the nation's most powerful and feared lawmakers, was sentenced to three years in prison Monday for a scheme to influence elections that already cost him his job, leadership post and millions of dollars in legal fees. The sentence comes after a jury in November convicted DeLay, a Houston-area Republican, on charges of money laundering and conspiracy to commit money laundering for using a political action committee to illegally send corporate donations to Texas House candidates in 2002. Prosecutors said DeLay will likely be free for months or even years as his appeal makes it through the Texas court system.​

The whole thing is exactly what Dave Chappele exemplified in this bit called "Tron Carter's Law & Order". Two different justice system's indeed.
Click to expand...


Wow rarely does one in power pay the price...
 
Boo Radley said:
I think both sides have a FEW of those people, but not enough to worry about.
Click to expand...


Agreed.

I do think that the entire "liberal media" effort is mostly excuse making. It has been a successful effort by republicans that plays well.
Click to expand...

Well, that could be, OR, it could be that people were watching the former President getting hammered for everything from policy, to vacations, and looking at it now all being ignored for this President....
 
j-mac said:
Agreed.



Well, that could be, OR, it could be that people were watching the former President getting hammered for everything from policy, to vacations, and looking at it now all being ignored for this President....
Click to expand...

That is a subjective view that assumes ALL circumstances are they same. They are not and really can't be
 
Last edited:
Boo Radley said:
That is a subjective view that assumes ALL circumstances are they same. They are not and really can't be
Click to expand...

I never said they were ALL the same. But one can certainly look for example at things like vacations, golf, etc. head to head, and wonder why the difference in coverage.
 
j-mac said:
I never said they were ALL the same. But one can certainly look for example at things like vacations, golf, etc. head to head, and wonder why the difference in coverage.
Click to expand...

Much different circumstances with the vacations, so they are not head to head. Your side is always ignoring he differences and pretending they re the same.
 
Boo Radley said:
Much different circumstances with the vacations, so they are not head to head. Your side is always ignoring he differences and pretending they re the same.
Click to expand...

Ok, what are the differences?
 
j-mac said:
Ok, what are the differences?
Click to expand...

Things were really going poorly in Iraq. The nation was war weary, and the president was making excuses. He took more vacations than anyone before him, and things like Katrina made him appear disconnected. The country has now largely settled in once running the wars, end dates are largely in sight, and budgetary items don't get the same emotional reaction.
 
Boo Radley said:
Things were really going poorly in Iraq.
Click to expand...

And now things are going poorly in Afghanistan, as well as ME policy in shambles.

The nation was war weary, and the president was making excuses.
Click to expand...

and today I see largely the same in this respect.

He took more vacations than anyone before him
Click to expand...

Bush's vacations were largely to his home in Texas, which was set up to run things from like Camp David, Obama certainly takes more to other places like the Vinyard, and Hawaii....Costing the taxpayer more money. IF anything, the american people have more to whine about with Obama's vacations than they ever did with Bush's.

and things like Katrina made him appear disconnected.
Click to expand...

Are you kidding? BP oil spill? Sandy? Both of these were lip service to the people then outta there.

The country has now largely settled in once running the wars, end dates are largely in sight, and budgetary items don't get the same emotional reaction.
Click to expand...

Yes, because people are sheep. The media during Bush was hammering negative story lines causing that emotional response, today they are covering for pure incompetence.
 
j-mac said:
And now things are going poorly in Afghanistan, as well as ME policy in shambles.



and today I see largely the same in this respect.



Bush's vacations were largely to his home in Texas, which was set up to run things from like Camp David, Obama certainly takes more to other places like the Vinyard, and Hawaii....Costing the taxpayer more money. IF anything, the american people have more to whine about with Obama's vacations than they ever did with Bush's.



Are you kidding? BP oil spill? Sandy? Both of these were lip service to the people then outta there.



Yes, because people are sheep. The media during Bush was hammering negative story lines causing that emotional response, today they are covering for pure incompetence.
Click to expand...

Not entirely true. You interpret it that way, but many outside partisan land don't. You guys tried to make such things an issue, but found no takers. The ME has always been problematic, before Bush, but we were not invading on a pretext. Nothing in Afghanistan equals the mess we had in Iraq, and we're not occupying and nation building in those countries over there struggling. So, again, real differences.

And frankly, Obama handled Sandy real well. Bush and republicans could earn from him. BP doesn't measure up to either in terms of comparison. So again, different.

You work like many to excuse Bush. He did things that put him in the medias light. His actions and lack of action in stories that warranted more coverage for a lot if reasons created the situation. Don't blame others. Bush needs to ate personal responsibility.
 
Boo Radley said:
Not entirely true. You interpret it that way, but many outside partisan land don't. You guys tried to make such things an issue, but found no takers. The ME has always been problematic, before Bush, but we were not invading on a pretext. Nothing in Afghanistan equals the mess we had in Iraq, and we're not occupying and nation building in those countries over there struggling. So, again, real differences.

And frankly, Obama handled Sandy real well. Bush and republicans could earn from him. BP doesn't measure up to either in terms of comparison. So again, different.

You work like many to excuse Bush. He did things that put him in the medias light. His actions and lack of action in stories that warranted more coverage for a lot if reasons created the situation. Don't blame others. Bush needs to ate personal responsibility.
Click to expand...


Unbelievable....Joe, I have to say my jaw is literally dropping as I read this sophistry....

Did you really accuse me of partisanship, yet not see that your own answers are purely partisan?

Did you really try and make this about your hurt feelings over Iraq and say that we aren't nation building under Obama? What in the hell are we even in Afghanistan at this point for then?

Did you really say that Obama handled Sandy well? Watch this...



Did you really say that BP didn't measure up in terms of crisis handling?

Did you really say Bush did things that warranted the media scrutiny, but Obama has not?

What world do you live in?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom