how is this not a flip flop?
 

Throughout this campaign the republicans gleefully attacked Kerry for "flip flopping" - changing his mind on issues.

Today the republicans decided to abolish their internal rule that says any member of the house in a leadership position must relinquish that position if he is indicted for a crime that could carry 2 or more years in jail. They did this, of course, because it's looking like Tom Delay might just get such an indictment.

The interesting part is that this rule is one the republicans dreamed up to prove that they were more ethical than the democrats. They seem to have. . changed their mind.

How is this not a flip flop? To the republican supporters on here, how can you reconcile this flip flop with the fact that your party just spent over a year mocking Kerry for flip flopping, and saying that flip flopping is a bad thing?

This should be interesting ;)

I just want to hear the rightly inclined rationalize delay's seemingly imminent indictment. Or the apparently normal ethics problems with his staff. I imagine it is the result of some sort of "vast left wing conspiracy".;)

I'm a conservative, and I think its bullshit. Whats good for the goose...

If your gonna make a rule, make it for the whole time, enough of following rules when it suits you. Both parties should take this to heart.

Tom Delay IS NOT a Senator, and therefore not in any leadership positions in the Senate.

Senate rules do not apply to Tom Delay.

Looking up the issue further I did see the house was considering changing it's rules to help Delay.

This is definately hypocracy.

The elections over btw...the flip-flop label stuck and looks to have worked. You didn't like it then...so don't use it know. Because that is also hypocracy.

Remember too, that the government can indict a ham sandwhich if they so decide.

-bear

j8ear,

It is a mistake by the original poster, this story has been floating around and it concerns the House, not the Senate.

BTW - I would disagree with the "imminent" comment regarding Delay. I don't think he will get hit on this one (we are day 500 or something of this investigation).

Also, I don't think many conservatives would agrue about the GOP flip-flopping. Too many people lumped together under one title for anything to remain consistent.

If it wasn't a political hit job, from a well know democrat prosecuter who has tried this crap before, I might care more.

A thousand pardons ;) I've already put in 45 hours this week and am a little tired. Post corrected.

Thank you. I appreciate your candidness - and I'm not being an ass here - it really is refreshing to see a conservative who is willing to say when their party screws up.
How? The republicans spent over a year saying that flip flopping is bad. It didn't suddenly become OK because the election is over. They should be held to what they said during the election, and that's what I'm doing by posting this.

Not quite. The government would have to find a grand jury willing to indict the ham sandwich. They might find one lunatic who would go along with it, but finding a whole grand jury would be a bit more difficult.

Finding a grand jury to indict someone because there appears to be enough evidence for a trial, however, is a bit easier.


Should we have said the same thing about the incessant Clinton persecutions? ;)

Look, whether it's a hit job or not, the republicans made a rule. They made it specifically to say "look here. We're more ethical then the democrats. See? We have this rule to prove it."

But now, as soon as it seems they might actually be effected by this rule, they get rid of it.

They want (and frankly are getting) their cake and eat it too.

The indict a ham sandwhich is an old adage, not sure where it originates, but essentially failure to obtain an indictment for anything they want is extremely rare, even for the most dubious of charges/reasons.

Happens all the time.

Still the flip-flop nonsense that was nonsense during the election is nonsense now. Don't fall into the trap of becoming what you despised. Nothing personal.

-bear

I don't think I am falling into that trap. I'm not saying whether it's wrong or right to flip flop. I'm saying it's wrong to spend so much time saying how awful flip flopping is, and then go flip flop yourself. That's ridiculous.

by inserting "retiring" between "democrat" and "prosecuter" it tells even more.

/I am more concerned with individual flip-flopping than group flip-flopping. It is too hard for a large group of any political persuasion to remain consistent on any issue (especiallu with constant changes in command).

I did and edited my post as well ;-)

Peace bro...

and now mine is reedited. We seem to be in a war to be at peace with each other here ;)

DeLay, Incorporated

Video: (high) (low)

i'm just glad a conservative flip-flop is worth starting a whole new thread over.

Yawn, Surprise surprise by that statement.

Texas Prosecutor Ronnie Earles record:
12 democratic officials, 4 republican officials.
They included himself, which he successfully convicted himself and paid the misdemeanor fine.

Other prominent Democrat prosecutions by Earle:
Winning a guilty plea for misuse of office against State Treasurer Warren G. Harding in 1982
Guilty plea on financial disclosure violations from the Texas House speaker, Gib Lewis, in 1992

This isn't just bullshit, the House Ethics panel admonished Delay already over this.
1) For trying to trade a favor for a congressman's vote on a health care bill.
2) For engaging in fund-raising activities that created the appearance of impropriety and for using his position to exert influence over a federal agency for political gain.
Considering he rules the House with an iron fist (demanding party loyalty etc.) and personally is responsible for either fundraising or awarding money to all but 4 Republicans currently in the House, those are pretty strong rebukes.

More than it is a flip flop, it is a clear indication of Delay's power and liklihood to be speaker. I saw his comment on it with some other members behind him claiming it really didn't have to do with him. Total, utter, bullshit.

I believe it is a partisan investigation (not that Delay really deserves better--but we all deserve better) and that does put them in a tough spot. It seems like a dumb rule. The new rule makes sense. The Dems never adopted the Rep.s rule. Still, decisions have consequences, and they deserve as least a little ridicule and scorn.

To all the DeLay haters out there, I say enjoy.

Rule change hurts Republicans in general, but only really helps Delay in the short term. He'll be pen-pals with Jim Trafficant, writing back and forth about the quality of their states respective penal food programs before the 109th congress is finished.

re-electing Tom Delay was a complete approval and vindication of his corruption in the US congress. It's quite plain and clear that his district wants an extortionist for their representative and to put more just like them in the texas seats.

Whatever you call him, it is my understanding that he was a major force behind the famous redistricting in Texas, which helped the Rep.s get a four or five seat pick-up. It may not be that the whole state wants a bunch of DeLays running around, but the districts can be manipulated to assist almost any political agenda if you get to draw them however you want. It has always been that way. It could be that the good people of Texas think exactly like they did a few years ago, but that the redistricting simply changed their representation drastically. Or they all love DeLay and want his clones in their district. One of the two.

Yes, Delay was a major force in the redistricting of texas, however, redistricting is something that should be done by the state, not a us congressman (no matter whether he's the majority leader or not), which is going to make some fine ammunition for whoever runs agains Perry for governer for bowing down to someone not part of the state government.

Yeah, maybe its a case of him 'flip flopping'.

Here is my question though. Why is that flip flopping is made out to be the weakest political trait? Obviously if you massivly change your stance toward big issues frequently then politically you seem erratic and unstable. But on the other hand isnt being open to discussion and pliancy on issues a sign of strength aswell. I mean the broad spectrum of political issues and discourse cannot be summed up into a 10 second soundbite. Or, is the public that docile that it needs purile little spoon fed chunks of information to understand things?

The investigation was started by a Democrat, true. However, the House ethics committee, led by Joel Hefley, some idiot from my home state, agrees that what Delay did was wrong. They've even 'threatened' Hefley for standing up to the Republican party.

More info:

"I was threatened"

Ethics Committe

Hefley to Delay: Shut up

Conservatives, Liberals blast Hefley

Ethics May Hold Back

Face it, a lot of the people (and committees, ethics included) in our government are corrupt tweeks. Call the shots as the are, regardless of party. We have a lot to work on in our democracy, and ravid loyalty on both sides doesn't help.

Spot on Sir. Spot on.

No matter how you slice it ALL POLITICIANS are 'flip-floppers' as it were. You have to be to survive.

Not all flip-flops, are however, hypocracy, like this one is.

The flip-flop label applied to Kerry was a brilliant campaigning stunt, that caught on and stuck like glue to ole Jean-Francios ;-)

I propose we get past this term, as Kerry supporters didn't like it during the campaign, and call this what it is:

Pure umitigated hubris, gaul, and hypocracy.

Not to discount the probable political motivation of the possible endictment, the unredistricting shepharded by Delay (and the apparent improper, possibly illegal use of the FAA to track down the fleeing democrats from the texas legislature), and the unlikelyhood, regardless of indictment, of any conviction of Delay. He is afterall a high level government operative and they are almost never held to task for the crimes THEY ALL commit.

-bear

Kerry as a flip-flopper was simply a campaign tactic. It may have tricked many people into thinking he was indecisive, but like j8ear wrote, all politicians are flip-floppers.
I must admit though, that Bush is particularly un-flip-floppish (i.e. stubborn), for better or worse, and that's why Kerry's natural politician's flippity-floppity-ness was so easy to emphasize.

Lets make sure we refrain from referring to the republicans as the conservatives y. I'm conservative, and a libertarian, the R. Party extremists often referred to on this board to me are radical. No not all of them, some of them...

Now as to the post, of course they've flip flopped. If I could convince a single R. or D. congressman tomorrow that Punchin baby jesus in the face was deemed good by 67% of the vote, I garauntee you that he'd be out on the steps tomorrow talking about how he's always supported baby jesus punchin' and will always be pro-punchin.

The one that killed any faith in two party politics for me was the uber flip-flop over the damn redistricting here in TX. The R's fouled up the districts to get them more power, which they cried foul on years before. shitty. The D's raised a national stink and hauled their hypocritical asses off to NM having forgotten they'ld done the same thing just a little bit before...shitty.



He who bitches loudest wins.

-fibber

Because... he isnt saying he only ever had one position... on Iraq

tehehe

politics in texas sure seems to be wild lately, no flips about it.



http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B0...CMZZZZZZZ_.jpg

christmas gift for your favorite politician? patriotic, bipartisan, $3.90 on sale

(then, to end the year, let's retire "flip flop.")

I, too, would consider myself a moderate conservative and think it's hypocritical to change a rule b/c it might affect leadership. I'm a big fan of taking responsibility for your actions. I was on "the Hill" during impeachment, the resignation of Newt Gingrich, and the castigation of Bob Livingston. (yes, I realize these are all different issues, except the impeachment WAS a legal issue, as much as the left wants to make it about sex.) The point is, they all had to pay a price for their actions.

In my opinion, they should make Delay step down if indicted and then have the opportunity to return to leadership if he isn't convicted. That would allow the party to have the ethical high-ground, but also allow for remedy if the indictment turns out to be a "political hitjob," as some have suggested.

DeLay deserves the shit he is getting in this thread--actually I think you all are going a little light on him. But I don't believe the "they are all flip-floppers" comments. These are the same as "they all do it" or "they are all corrupt." These are excuses to not talk about the issue at hand. Yes, all policitians have changed positions at one time or another. This doesn't mean that they are flip-floppers or that all flip-flopping is equal. I think Kerry was very adept and prolific at the flipping and flopping, much more so than most politicians. This isn't always a bad thing, but nuance can sometimes lead to indecision, stasis, and confusion. Witness his lack of really doing anything in the senate over several terms and the incoherance of his story on Iraq. I agree that Bush may be better off to flip and flop a little bit, but it wasn't the contrast that made Kerry a flipper, it was his own positions and his own words. The label stuck because it was mostly correct.

This isn't "flip flopping" anyway, this is just rank hypocracy. It's something that House Republicans have honed to a fine art in the past 12 years.

Just adding "Do as I say, not as I do", to the long list of pharisaisms practiced by the Party of Morals like feverishly pursuing sexual misconduct as you boff your mistress in your own office and sponsoring hate amendments while calling gay dating hotlines.

Now we're getting a good anger on. I can't believe there aren't more people out there wanting to hammer "the hammer" on this one. Here is some more interesting background information. http://www.larouchepub.com/other/200...y_cronies.html

To say that just the Repubbies practice this is for lack of a better word.... vexing. I am terribly vexed. ;)

-fibber

I will say that.
The democrats at least have the good sense to not take a party position against human falibility and differences.
It's the best thing about the Democrats, to not be a wholly owned subsidiary of the Christian Coalition.