By Matt for the TIB Network:
I haven't brought up the Delay "thing" because it really didn't interest me. But I keep seeing liberals throwing a fit over the rule change. I'd like to point out to those folks that it isn't "the" rule; it is "their" rule. That's right, the Democrats don't have a rule like it.And while I don't care for the circumstances under which this rule was enacted (it apparently applied some pressure on some Dems in a tought spot), it doesn't change the fact that the Republicans have every right to change their rules for who can and can not be a "leader" in their caucus.
Now, to the particulars of the case...
The rule was that no leader could serve if they were being indicted for a crime. Which sounds like a good idea. Until you realize that there are Democrats out there who will cheat and use it to their advantage. Which is exactly what has happened with DeLay. Some Democrat hack of a prosecuter has brought trumped up charges against a couple of DeLay's campaign staff alleging that corporate contributions were illegally used for campaign purposes. The proof? Company A donated to the RNC and yes, you guessed it, the RNC provided funding to DeLay. There is no case here.
But let's address the ethics of the rule. Personally, I would have thought that a better rule would be no Republican convicted of a crime while in office shall serve. Period. Criminals shouldn't be representing us. I don't care if they are Republicans, Democrats, Independents, Communists, Socialists, Liberals, or Conservatives.
Now, who has a problem with that?
Islamofascism Delenda Est!
Current Arafat Status:
