DeLay Uses Bully Tactics of Bush
Tom DeLay recently uses threatening language against Judge Briggs, the ruling judge for the Terri Schiavo case: DeLay issued a statement asserting that "the time will come for the men responsible for this to answer for their behavior." He later said in front of television cameras that he wants to "look at an arrogant, out-of-control, unaccountable judiciary that thumbed their nose at Congress and the president." (this from Americablog.org)
This comment has had other law-makers (Ted Kennedy and others) demand he specifically retract or make clear he's not inciting violence. No comment from Mr. DeLay. President Bush in his continual head-banging-against-cement-push to convince people his threatening Social Security Bill must be passed, has begun to use threatening language against his opponents as well. "Bush said during the social security push: "I think there is a political price for saying, `It's not a problem, I'm going to stay away from the table.' Is this the way to run a government? Bully boy tactics? Why is there no willingness to dialogue? Because ideologues have no room for any opinions other than their own, or because at the core of each initiative is a basic lack of integrity and emptiness?
This comment has had other law-makers (Ted Kennedy and others) demand he specifically retract or make clear he's not inciting violence. No comment from Mr. DeLay. President Bush in his continual head-banging-against-cement-push to convince people his threatening Social Security Bill must be passed, has begun to use threatening language against his opponents as well. "Bush said during the social security push: "I think there is a political price for saying, `It's not a problem, I'm going to stay away from the table.' Is this the way to run a government? Bully boy tactics? Why is there no willingness to dialogue? Because ideologues have no room for any opinions other than their own, or because at the core of each initiative is a basic lack of integrity and emptiness?
posted by Phil at 12:32 PM
1 Comments:
Here's an interesting bit of information from Slate magazine, about a best-seller that I have never heard of:
"Levin pays some lip service to the idea that the federal bench needs to be stacked with right-wing ideologues in his penultimate chapter. But he betrays early on his fear that even the staunchest conservative jurist is all-too-often "seduced by the liberal establishment once they move inside the Beltway." Thus, his real fixes for the problem of judicial overreaching go further than manipulating the appointments process. He wants to cut all judges off at the knees: He'd like to give force to the impeachment rules, put legislative limits on the kinds of constitutional questions courts may review, and institute judicial term limits. He'd also amend the Constitution to give congress a veto over the court's decisions. Each of which imperils the notion of an independent judiciary and of three separate, co-equal branches of government. But the Levins of the world are not interested in a co-equal judiciary. They seem to want to see it burn"
--Dalia Lithwick, "The Limbaugh Code" http://slate.msn.com/id/2116087/
That's right, kids! Never mind stacking the Judiciary! Let's just castrate it! This will be the true legacy of Terri Schiavo: don't bother with backroom machinations--do it in front of everyone by making anyone who disagrees with you--even the most conservative judges in recent history--the enemy.
Post a Comment
<< Home