Let's Keep The Crooks In Power!
The GOP apparently doesn't care if you're a crook, as long as you're one of their crooks, according to a Washington Post story by Charles Babington. House Republicans proposed changing their rules to allow members indicted by state grand juries to remain in their posts. Surprise, surprise, this might just benefit Majority Leader Tom DeLay, in case he's charged by a Texas grand jury, that's already indicted three of his political associates:
House GOP leaders and aides said many rank-and-file Republicans are eager to change the rule to help DeLay, and will do so if given a chance at today's closed meeting. A handful of them have proposed language for changing the rule, and they will be free to offer amendments, officials said. Some aides said it was conceivable that DeLay and Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) ultimately could decide the move would be politically damaging and ask their caucus not to do it. But Rep. Jack Kingston (Ga.), another member of the GOP leadership, said he did not think Hastert and DeLay would intervene.House Republicans adopted the indictment rule in 1993, when they were trying to end four decades of Democratic control of the House, in part by highlighting Democrats' ethical lapses. They said at the time that they held themselves to higher standards than prominent Democrats such as then-Ways and Means Chairman Dan Rostenkowski (Ill.), who eventually pleaded guilty to mail fraud and was sentenced to prison.
The GOP rule drew little notice until this fall, when DeLay's associates were indicted and Republican lawmakers began to worry that their majority leader might be forced to step aside if the grand jury targeted him next. Democrats and watchdog groups blasted the Republicans' proposal last night.
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said last night: "If they make this rules change, Republicans will confirm yet again that they simply do not care if their leaders are ethical. If Republicans believe that an indicted member should be allowed to hold a top leadership position in the House of Representatives, their arrogance is astonishing."







Me, too. I hate it when republicans start getting all ethically challenged and acting like democrats. And then, too, I hate it when democrats get all highly ethical and righteously indignant over unethical behavior and acting like republicans. Can't we all just get along and pretend we're ethical? C'mon, you're politicians for godssake, and most of you are lawyers, as well. You wear ethics like a farm boy wears a Monkey Ward's seersucker suit and bowtie.
allan at November 17, 2004 6:02 PM
Ethics-scratchin' is now barely more than an annoying itch
http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=109&STORY=/www/story/11-18-2004/0002464301&EDATE=
viktor at November 18, 2004 2:47 PM
The vote was taken by voice vote out of the public eye and apparently it carried. But Josh Marshall over at www.talkinpointsmemo.com has been contacting Repub representatives all over the country and none of them will fess up to having voted to lift the ban. Fancy that!
moe at November 18, 2004 4:24 PM