New Hope for DeLay

Congressman Tom DeLay is to have his say before the House Ethics Committee:

Retreating under pressure, Republicans on the House ethics committee said Wednesday they were ready to open an investigation into allegations of wrongdoing against Majority Leader Tom DeLay.

Four of the five Republicans on the committee were ready to move ahead, said Rep. Doc Hastings, the panel's Republican chairman. The panel also has five Democratic members.

The Republicans were ''prepared to vote at the earliest opportunity to empanel an investigations subcommittee to review various allegations concerning travel and other actions'' by DeLay, he said.

The ethics committee has authority to start an investigation based on information it receives ''through public and other sources,'' Hastings said.

A good opportunity to clear his name.

Comments

[Morat]

That's sarcasm, right? I mean, given that Delay himself had the Committee purged of all Republicans that DARED vote to censure him last time....and replaced them all with personal loyalists, I can't see this being 'fair' -- even by partisan standards.

[Anderson]

I hope the Ethics Committee doesn't use that "internet" thing in its research.

[cleek]

let me guess... there's some procedural trick that will prevent any negative findings from being made public, or even investigated.

[Slartibartfast]

there's some procedural trick

Slart's Law: If a rule works toward your purpose, it's a "rule". If it works counter to your purpose, it's a "procedural trick" or a "loophole".

[cleek]

Slart's Law

thanks. i'll make a note of that.

and i'll take your snark as an implicit defense of DeLay.

[Slartibartfast]

and i'll take your snark as an implicit defense of DeLay.

You know, I had no idea when I woke up this morning that I'd have quite so many of my positions invented for me. Thanks, that saves me quite a lot of time and effort. Still, the annoyance at my completely made-up positions should be directed at the one who made it up to begin with.

Just sayin'.

[Edward]

gotta side with Slart here cleek

he was just having fun, and you took it the wrong way.

[Slartibartfast]

Thanks, Edward. It's got to be said, though, that I was semi-serious. But regardless of whether it was serious or not, it's hard to see where the defense of Delay comes in. Probably it would be much more obvious to those more practised to reading between the lines than I.

Now, if it's a law about rules, does that make it a meta-rule? This is an area of my education that's sadly lacking.

[Edward]

semi-serious or not, it was a generic observation and not a defense of DeLay (as far as I could tell).

[Slartibartfast]

Correct, Edward.

[Macallan]

Correct, Edward.

Yes, but how do you square that with your assertion that Edward loves to eat Spam® while listening to Roy Orbison? Defend yourself man!

[kenB]

it's hard to see where the defense of Delay comes in.

Just another instance of a "if you're not 100% with me then you're against me" mentality that pops up here from time to time.

[Edward]

hmmmmm....Spa-a-a-a-a-mmmmm®

slightly whorish move here (but only slightly*): one of my artists is responsible for this photo. (and yes, that's what you think it is in the river.)

*The edition is sold out, so you couldn't buy it if you wanted to.

Just another instance of a "if you're not 100% with me then you're against me" mentality that pops up here from time to time.

And by "here" you mean the White House? ;-p

[Macallan]

Spam as flotsam. Brilliant!

[kenB]

one of my artists is responsible for this photo.

But what does it mean??? I don't want to spend 15 years staring at it before I figure it out. Are there vikings faintly visible below the surface?

[tonydismukes]

"Slart's Law: If a rule works toward your purpose, it's a "rule". If it works counter to your purpose, it's a "procedural trick" or a "loophole"."

Sometimes it's a "technicality."

[Edward]

But what does it mean??? I don't want to spend 15 years staring at it before I figure it out.

Some could spend 15 centuries and still not "figure it out" kenB...others would just enjoy the image for what they get from it immediately, if anything. Individual choice.

No vikings, just rocks...although I like that you went there.

[rilkefan]

Spaaaaam in the waaaater,
Square pigs in the sky-y.

As sung by Deep Pink.

[kenB]

would just enjoy the image for what they get from it immediately, if anything.

I immediately enjoyed the gaffney_3 image with the frozen river and the 2 rocks and colorful item in the mid-foreground, but I'm not sure why I did. Is that one sold out too?

[Edward]

that's one of my favorites too, kenB....not sold out though...although I feel odd doing anything even approaching "business" on the blog. If you found that image, you've found what you need to contact the gallery for more info...happy to talk about my artists all day in some other forum.

[Ugh]

Luke Skywalker's helping Tom Delay?!!?

[rilkefan]

Or maybe:

Spaaaaam in the waaaater,
Square pigs in the sky-y.
Pooooork in the waaaater.

Oink oink oinkoink, oink oink oi oinkoink, oink oink oinkoink, oink oink...

BTW, anybody see the Monty Python adaptation on Broadway?

[Slartibartfast]

I can make you feel, but I can't make you think.
Your Spam's in the gutter, your love's in the sink.

[rilkefan]

Slart, that makes about as much sense as the original. "Thick as a brick of spam"...

By the way, all Jethro Tull fans out there who aren't familiar with Ian Anderson's The Secret Language of Birds should rush out and get it.

[cleek]

he was just having fun, and you took it the wrong way.

hmm. i thought i was having a little fun, too. guess i need to indicate my mood better. more smileys ?

[liberal japonicus]

"Slart's Law: If a rule works toward your purpose, it's a "rule". If it works counter to your purpose, it's a "procedural trick" or a "loophole"."

I'll be watching for you in the filibuster/nuclear option threads...

[rilkefan]

Something along the lines of Slart's law.

[Edward]

BTW, anybody see the Monty Python adaptation on Broadway?

No, but we did see Tim Curry and David Hyde Pierce at a restaurant with cast members this past Sunday.

[Chuchundra]

I saw Spamalot and it was hysterical. I saw it in preview, so it may have changed a bit since then. But it's a tremendous production.

[Slartibartfast]

I'll be watching for you in the filibuster/nuclear option threads...

I've said much the same thing in those places, though less concisely.

[Slartibartfast]

Something along the lines of Slart's law.

I like it.

[ral]

Every word you post,
Every chat you host,
Every slice you toast,
I'll be watching you.

[liberal japonicus]

Every slice you toast,

Every newbie you roast?

[CaseyL]

Every claim you boast,
Every petard you hoist,
I'll be watching you.

[123concrete]

The important thing is that we look at all the ethic issues both Delay and Pelosi's problems.

www.washingtontimes.com

[Edward]

The important thing is that we look at all the ethic issues both Delay and Pelosi's problems.

I totally agree. Pelosi broke the rules she needs to pay.

Same for DeLay.

Anyone taking bets?

[123concrete]

In the end, both Dem's and Rep's will work to protect the system and indirectly each other.

It will take more than what is currently going on to cause change.

[Edward]

In the end, both Dem's and Rep's will work to protect the system and indirectly each other.

So long as DeLay doesn't get his way, you mean.

[Tinker]

Let me see if I understand the strategy here.

Attack Delay loudly...

Silently ignore Democrat's...

http://www.sfgate.com

[Tinker]

I can still hear the sounds of silence... and hypocracy.