Justice Delayed

Rep. Chris Shays (R-CT) on the DeLay pass:

Washington, D.C. -- ''We took a strong stand in 1994 to make clear the Republican conference would live by a higher standard than our Democratic colleagues. This was instrumental in winning a Republican Congress for the first time in 40 years and the driving force behind passing the Congressional Accountability Act in the historic 104th Congress. Today, I spoke out against the amendment and voted against it because I believe it is a step in the wrong direction.''

  article

Josh Marshall has an ongoing list of posts, trying to find out who voted for the rule and who voted against it. (In case you're new to the game, the rule was apparently approved in Congress.)

Rep. Trent Frank, R-Ariz., said the rule change was needed, "as it protects elected officials from the vindictive actions of politically motivated prosecutors."

"We are innocent until proven guilty in this nation, and to change the rule so that removal is based upon a conviction and not an indictment is proper," Franks said.

  AZ Central article

You know something? I could certainly agree with that. But, if the rule as it stood were good enough for lo these many years before it threatened Tom DeLay, then it's a bit disingenuous to fault it now.

Arizona Democrat Rep. Raul Grijalva called such a rule change hypocritical and convenient.

Grijalva also called it ironic that it had been Republicans who in 1992 had advocated such a rule requiring the removal of an indicted leader in the first place when they were in the House minority.

Yeah. As I was saying.

"I think it's going to be difficult for them (Republicans) to explain why they custom-make rules as they go along depending on the circumstances they find themselves in."

Explain? They don't have to explain. Didn't we learn anything from Derr Fuhrer?

"I'm the commander. See, I don't have to explain why I say things. . . . I don't feel like I owe anybody an explanation.'' [Bush to Bob Woodward]

And a couple other choice quotes found in this New York Metro article:

''People can understand what I'm talking about, changing the culture from one that says, If it feels good, do it, and if you've got a problem, blame somebody else, to a culture in which each of us understands we're responsible for the decisions we make in life. I call it the responsibility era. I can be a voice for cultural change.''

Please tell me when this man has ever in his life taken responsibility for anything. He is the King of Blaming, one more characteristic that supports the view of him as someone whose development was arrested in adolescence.

Asked whether he is winning that crusade, he said, ''Yes.'' He offered this evidence: ''Something's happening in America. When I'm walking the rope line, people say things different than they did four years ago. . . . I bet you every other person or every third person says, ''Mr. President, my family prays for you.'' It's not, you know, ''Good luck, I hope you go tear down your opponent.'' . . . It's ''My family prays for you.''

I'm surprised it isn't every person, since they only permit his Christian base to get near the "rope line".

Actually, the article is pre-election and it's subject is how Bush appeals to voters in today's America. It's called The Chosen People: How Bush plays to the appealing delusion that America is a nation with a special calling to redeem the world. Very good article by Richard Reeves.

The idea of American righteousness has always been powerful at home. ''Avoid foreign entanglements,'' said George Washington. ''The last best hope,''' said Abraham Lincoln. ''shining city on a hill,'' said Ronald Reagan. That is what professors call ''American exceptionalism'': We think we are not like other people because God did shed his grace on us. A lot of Americans, Reagan one of them, have always believed, simply and deeply, that we are better than other people. That is a key to President Bush's rhetoric. The old story: We are going to save the world, whether or not the world wants to be saved.

[...]

This campaign, I would argue, is one of the last convulsions of angry, real American men, fighting desperately (and well) to hold back the time and tide of the new the un-white and un-Christian, and girlie-men, too, who sooner or later will be America. Bush has the Father Knows Best vote, from men who have lost their personal power and hate what is happening all around them.

Read the whole thing. And maybe check out this older article: Why Are Blue-Collar Workers Pro-Bush?

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.