0
   

Has the Schiavo case Become a Political Football?

 
 
Dookiestix
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Mar, 2005 01:08 pm
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-delay27mar27,0,5710023.story?coll=la-home-headlines

Quote:
CANYON LAKE, Texas ?- A family tragedy that unfolded in a Texas hospital during the fall of 1988 was a private ordeal ?- without judges, emergency sessions of Congress or the debate raging outside Terri Schiavo's Florida hospice.

The patient then was a 65-year-old drilling contractor, badly injured in a freak accident at his home. Among the family members keeping vigil at Brooke Army Medical Center was a grieving junior congressman ?- Rep. Tom DeLay (R-Texas).

More than 16 years ago, far from the political passions that have defined the Schiavo controversy, the DeLay family endured its own wrenching end-of-life crisis. The man in a coma, kept alive by intravenous lines and oxygen equipment, was DeLay's father, Charles Ray DeLay.

Then, freshly reelected to a third term in the House, the 41-year-old DeLay waited, all but helpless, for the verdict of doctors.

Today, as House Majority Leader, DeLay has teamed with his Senate counterpart, Bill Frist (R-Tenn.), to champion political intervention in the Schiavo case. They pushed emergency legislation through Congress to shift the legal case from Florida state courts to the federal judiciary.

And DeLay is among the strongest advocates of keeping the woman, who doctors say has been in a persistent vegetative state for 15 years, connected to her feeding tube. DeLay has denounced Schiavo's husband, as well as judges, for committing what he calls "an act of barbarism" in removing the tube.

In 1988, however, there was no such fiery rhetoric as the congressman quietly joined the sad family consensus to let his father die.

"There was no point to even really talking about it," Maxine DeLay, the congressman's 81-year-old widowed mother, recalled in an interview last week. "There was no way [Charles] wanted to live like that. Tom knew ?- we all knew ?- his father wouldn't have wanted to live that way."

Doctors advised that he would "basically be a vegetable," said the congressman's aunt, JoAnne DeLay.

When his father's kidneys failed, the DeLay family decided against connecting him to a dialysis machine. "Extraordinary measures to prolong life were not initiated," said his medical report, citing "agreement with the family's wishes." His bedside chart carried the instruction: "Do not resuscitate."

On Dec. 14, 1988, the DeLay patriarch "expired with his family in attendance."

"The situation faced by the congressman's family was entirely different than Terri Schiavo's," said a spokesman for the majority leader, who declined requests for an interview.

"The only thing keeping her alive is the food and water we all need to survive. His father was on a ventilator and other machines to sustain him," said Dan Allen, DeLay's press aide.

There were also these similarities: Both stricken patients were severely brain-damaged. Both were incapable of surviving without medical assistance. Both were said to have expressed a desire to be spared from being kept alive by artificial means. And neither of them had a living will.

This previously unpublished account of the majority leader's personal brush with life-ending decisions was assembled from court files, medical records and interviews with family members.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It was a pleasant late afternoon in the Hill Country of Texas on Nov. 17, 1988.

At Charles and Maxine DeLay's home, set on a limestone bluff of cedars and live oaks, it also was a moment of triumph. Charles and his brother, Jerry DeLay, two avid tinkerers, had just finished work on a new backyard tram ?- an elevator-like device that would carry family and friends down a 200-foot slope to the blue-green waters of Canyon Lake.

The two men called for their wives to hop aboard. Charles pushed the button and the maiden run began. Within seconds, a horrific screeching noise echoed across the still lake ?- "a sickening sound," said a neighbor. The tram was in trouble.

Maxine, seated up front in the four-passenger trolley, said her husband repeatedly tried to engage the emergency brake, but the rail car kept picking up speed. Halfway down the bank, it was free-wheeling, according to accident investigators.

Moments later, it jumped the track and slammed into a tree, scattering passengers and debris in all directions.

"It was awful, just awful," recalled Karl Braddick, now 86, the DeLays' neighbor at the time. "I came running over, and it was a terrible sight."

He called for emergency help. Rescue workers had trouble bringing the injured victims up the steep terrain. Jerry's wife, JoAnne, suffered broken bones and a shattered elbow. Charles, who had been thrown head-first into a tree, was in grave condition.

"He was all but gone," said Braddick, gesturing at the spot of the accident as he offered a visitor a ride down to the lake in his own tram. "He would have been better off if he'd died right there and then."

But Charles DeLay hung on. In the ambulance on his way to a hospital in New Braunfels 15 miles away, he tried to speak.

"He wasn't making any sense; it was mainly just cuss words," recalled Maxine with a faint, fond smile.

Four hours later, he was airlifted by helicopter to the Brooke Army Medical Center at Ft. Sam Houston. Admission records show he arrived with multiple injuries, including broken ribs and a brain hemorrhage.

Tom DeLay flew to his father's bedside, where, along with his two brothers and a sister, they joined their mother. In the weeks that followed, the congressman made repeated trips back from Washington, his family said. Maxine seldom left her husband's side.

"Mama stayed at the hospital with him all the time. Oh, it was terrible for everyone," said Alvina "Vi" Skogen, a former sister-in-law of the congressman. Neighbor Braddick visited the hospital and said it seemed very clear to everyone that there was little prospect of recovery.

"He had no consciousness that I could see," Braddick said. "He did a bit of moaning and groaning, I guess, but you could see there was no way he was coming back."

Maxine DeLay agreed that she was never aware of any consciousness on her husband's part during the long days of her bedside vigil ?- with one possible exception.

"Whenever Randy walked into the room, his heart, his pulse rate, would go up a little bit," she said of their son, Randall, the congressman's younger brother, who lives near Houston.

Doctors conducted a series of tests, including scans of his head, face, neck and abdomen. They checked for lung damage and performed a tracheostomy to assist his breathing. But they could not prevent steady deterioration.

Then, infections complicated the senior DeLay's fight for life. Finally, his organs began to fail. His family and physicians confronted the dreaded choice so many other Americans have faced: to make heroic efforts or to let the end come.

"Daddy did not want to be a vegetable," said Skogen, one of his daughters-in-law at the time. "There was no decision for the family to make. He made it for them."

The preliminary decision to withhold dialysis and other treatments fell to Maxine along with Randall and her daughter Tena ?- and "Tom went along." He raised no objection, said the congressman's mother.

Family members said they prayed.

Jerry DeLay "felt terribly about the accident" that injured his brother, said his wife, JoAnne. "He prayed that, if [Charles] couldn't have quality of life, that God would take him ?- and that is exactly what he did."

Charles Ray DeLay died at 3:17 a.m., according to his death certificate, 27 days after plummeting down the hillside.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The family then turned to lawyers.

In 1990, the DeLays filed suit against Midcap Bearing Corp. of San Antonio and Lovejoy Inc. of Illinois, the distributor and maker of a coupling that the family said had failed and caused the tram to hurtle out of control.

The family's wrongful death lawsuit accused the companies of negligence and sought actual and punitive damages. Lawyers for the companies denied the allegations and countersued the surviving designer of the tram system, Jerry DeLay.

The case thrust Rep. DeLay into unfamiliar territory ?- the front page of a civil complaint as a plaintiff. He is an outspoken defender of business against what he calls the crippling effects of "predatory, self-serving litigation."

The DeLay family litigation sought unspecified compensation for, among other things, the dead father's "physical pain and suffering, mental anguish and trauma," and the mother's grief, sorrow and loss of companionship.

Their lawsuit also alleged violations of the Texas product liability law.

The DeLay case moved slowly through the Texas judicial system, accumulating more than 500 pages of motions, affidavits and disclosures over nearly three years. Among the affidavits was one filed by the congressman, but family members said he had little direct involvement in the lawsuit, leaving that to his brother Randall, an attorney.

Rep. DeLay, who since has taken a leading role promoting tort reform, wants to rein in trial lawyers to protect American businesses from what he calls "frivolous, parasitic lawsuits" that raise insurance premiums and "kill jobs."

Last September, he expressed less than warm sentiment for attorneys when he took the floor of the House to condemn trial lawyers who, he said, "get fat off the pain" of plaintiffs and off "the hard work" of defendants.

Aides for DeLay defended his role as a plaintiff in the family lawsuit, saying he did not follow the legal case and was not aware of its final outcome.

The case was resolved in 1993 with payment of an undisclosed sum, said to be about $250,000, according to sources familiar with the out-of-court settlement. DeLay signed over his share of any proceeds to his mother, said his aides.

Three years later, DeLay cosponsored a bill specifically designed to override state laws on product liability such as the one cited in his family's lawsuit. The legislation provided sweeping exemptions for product sellers.

The 1996 bill was vetoed by President Clinton, who said he objected to the DeLay-backed measure because it "tilts against American families and would deprive them of the ability to recover fully when they are injured by a defective product."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

After her husband's death, Maxine DeLay scrapped the mangled tram at the bottom of the hill and sold the family's lake house.

Today, she lives alone in a Houston senior citizen residence. Like much of the country, she is following news developments in the Schiavo case and her son's prominent role.

She acknowledged questions comparing her family's decision in 1988 to the Schiavo conflict with a slight smile. "It's certainly interesting, isn't it?"

She had a new hairdo for Easter and puffed on a cigarette outside her assisted-living residence as she sat back comparing the cases.

Like her son, she believed there might be hope for Terri Schiavo's recovery. That's what made her family's experience different, she said. Charles had no hope.

"There was no chance he was ever coming back," she said.


Verhovek reported from Canyon Lake, Texas; Roche reported from Washington. Also contributing to this report were Times researchers Lianne Hart in San Antonio and Nona Yates in Los Angeles.
0 Replies
 
Ethel2
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Mar, 2005 01:17 pm
http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/johansen200503160848.asp

Here's an example of the kind of report that continues to confuse the issue.

http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/johansen200503160848.asp

And here is a relevant argument about it.

Quote:
At National Review Online, Father Rob Johansen writes about the legal proceedings surrounding Terri Schiavo. The point I'm interested in is Johansen's contention that "[e]xpert witnesses in court are supposed to be unbiased: disinterested in the outcome of the case. Part of the procedure in qualifying expert witnesses is establishing that they are objective and unbiased." Johansen argues that an expert witness, Dr. Cranford, who testified Schiavo was in a persistent vegetative state was a biased witness because he is allegedly an advocate "in the 'right to die' and euthanasia movements." Says Johansen, "one needs to know a little about Cranford's background and perspective" in order to evaluate Cranford's opinions.

To support his argument, Johansen quotes some neurologists to whom he provided a selective account of the medical evidence and legal proceedings.

Among them, there's "Dr. William Bell, a professor of neurology at Wake Forest University Medical School." For some strange reason, Johansen doesn't think we need to know a little -- or anything -- about Bell's background or perspective. Among other things, Bell is a member of the Christian Medical and Dental Society. Although Johansen obviously thinks otherwise, you might be interested to know that the Christian Medical and Dental Society believes that "[t]he human body belongs to God," holds some bigoted psuedo-scientific views about homosexuality, and compares embryonic stem cell research to Nazi war crimes.

No bias or interest there. And I'm sure Johansen picked Bell entirely at random, as opposed to selecting him for the outcome he desires.

Then there's "Dr. Thomas Zabiega, who trained at the University of Chicago." I think we can presume that's Thomas Zabiega, M.D., Vice President for Legislative Affairs for the Catholic Physicians' Guild of Chicago. Let's keep that Father Rob's little secret, shall we?

In the article, Father Rob makes it sound as if Dr. Bell is hearing about the Schiavo case for the first time. ("I have spent the past ten days recruiting and interviewing neurologists willing to come forward and offer affidavits or declarations concerning new testing and examinations for Terri....") Yet Bell, apparently accepting Father Rob's version as gospel, has made up his mind: "It seems as though they're fearful of any additional information," "medical realities are no longer governing this case," "once a decision is made they don't want additional information." No prejudgment there either.

Father Rob is a man who likes to cherry-pick his experts and avoid disclosure of important but inconvenient facts. If we judge him by his own standard, he can't be trusted.


http://familyphysiciansgroup.familydoctors.net/prov99796378.php

Quote:
Peter Morin

Born and raised in Lincoln, Nebraska, Dr. Peter Morin is the eighth of nine children. He has fond memories from his childhood growing up in an old house in the Near South Neighborhood. During his years at Pius X High School, Dr. Morin participated in cross country, track, and National Honor Society, and was elected Speaker of the Class for graduation. After earning a B.S. in Biology from the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Dr. Morin married his high school sweetheart, Mary. The young couple moved to Omaha while Dr. Morin attended the University of Nebraska College of Medicine to pursue his goal of becoming a family practice physician. Dr. Morin's commitment to family practice stems form his concern for people of all ages, his desire to care for the "whole" person, and his interest in a treating a wide variety of medical conditions. After graduating from the University of Nebraska Medical Center, Dr. Morin completed his training at the Lincoln Family Practice Residency Program, located in Lincoln, Nebraska. Following residency, Dr. Morin joined Family Physicians Group, P.C., allowing him the opportunity to serve his hometown community. Dr. Morin is a certified consultant for Natural Family Planning and is an NFP only physician. Dr. Morin and his wife, Mary, have been blessed with five children and enjoy family oriented hobbies including biking, hiking, gardening, and playing music together. The Morins are members of St. Teresa Catholic Church and spend much of their free time in church and school related activities. Dr. Morin considers himself a pretty decent mandolin, a well-loved husband and father, and lucky to have a job he enjoys.
0 Replies
 
PDiddie
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Mar, 2005 02:01 pm
Quote:
Has the Schiavo case Become a Political Football?


http://webpages.charter.net/micah/repjesus57.gif
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Mar, 2005 02:07 pm
Ray, PDiddie. I knew you would weigh in.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Mar, 2005 02:10 pm
Here's another.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v97/imposter222/tomdelay.jpg
0 Replies
 
Joe Nation
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Mar, 2005 02:16 pm
Another reminder, folks, in some States (or Countries) you will need more than a Living Will, you will need a Durable Power of Attorney notarized and on file with your primary physician. Check your State Law today.

Joe(We filled ours out a year ago)Nation
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Mar, 2005 02:20 pm
Advance Politician to English translation

"I've milked this issue of the last drop of political gain, and it may even be at a point where it will backfire on me so it's everybody out of the pool and good luck and God speed uh, uh, uh, what was that girls name again?"

http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/03/27/schiavo/index.html
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Mar, 2005 02:38 pm
Somewhat a related issue as the conservatives control Congress.
*******************
The Not-So-Fantastic Four
The demise of the Republican moderates.
By Michael Crowley
Posted Thursday, March 24, 2005, at 11:34 AM PT



Fading into the background

Let us pause a moment to recall that Congress busies itself with matters other than Terri Schiavo's feeding tube. Some of them, in fact, affect quite a lot of people. One vote you might have missed last week said a lot about what the next couple of years will be like on Capitol Hill.

The vote involved the fundamental question of how Congress balances tax cuts against spending. During the Senate's annual budget debate, which sets guidelines for the year's spending bills, some senators pushed a measure to require that any new tax cuts be paid for with an equivalent, offsetting spending cut. Alternately, any spending hike would need to be balanced with a commensurate tax increase. This is known as "pay as you go" budgeting. Democrats love it because it puts the Republicans' cherished tax cuts directly in conflict with unpopular spending cuts.

But several Republicans were backing this measure, too. These Republicans believe that the GOP's obsession with tax-cutting in the face of huge deficits has perverted classic fiscal conservatism. To them, pay-as-you-go is a means of restoring sanity to the budget. They are the Senate's plucky band of Republican moderates: Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island, Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe of Maine, and John McCain of Arizona.


In recent years these moderates have become heroes to Democrats?-paragons of conscience and bravery?-and pariahs to conservatives?-heretic "Daschle Republicans." As the GOP has moved to the right, the moderates have struggled valiantly to stand firm in the center, voting repeatedly with Democrats on key issues. I've heard some Democrats fawningly dub them the Fantastic Four, after the team of comic-book superheroes who unwittingly acquired supernatural powers from the cosmic ray of a solar flare. OK, McCain may not be much like the Thing, Chafee isn't as hot as the Human Torch, and neither Collins nor Snowe would want to be dubbed the Invisible Woman (crafty as she was!). But by the standards of hyper-partisan Washington, there has been something almost supernatural about the way these senators defy their party's aggressive right wing on behalf of their principles. In the recent past, the Fantastic Four have been a useful check on congressional GOP excesses. Of late, however, their powers are waning.

Hopes were high for last week's pay-as-you-go vote, because the moderates succeeded in pushing through just such a measure a year ago. Rather than accede then to pay-as-you-go rules, furious GOP leaders opted for the spectacle of passing no budget resolution at all. It was a significant moral and public-relations victory for the mod squad. But this year things were different. When pay-as-you-go came to a Senate vote again last week, it failed to pass despite the intense efforts of the Fantastic Four. That's one of several defeats the moderates have suffered recently. Last week, when the Senate defeated an effort to block oil drilling in Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, the moderates voted with the Democrats once again, and once again it didn't matter. Most tellingly, perhaps, it looks increasingly likely that the mods won't be able to stop the most radical move the Senate has seen in years: the Republican push to deploy the "nuclear option" that would rewrite Senate rules to end filibusters of judicial nominees.

How things have changed. It's hard to remember now, but back in the spring of 2001, the fate of the Bush administration seemed to hinge on the Senate's hearty moderate band. After Vermont Sen. Jim Jeffords dashed across the political DMZ and declared himself an independent, evenly splitting the Senate between the parties, it seemed as if the threat of a Jeffords repeat?-Chafee, for one, began making noises about defection?-could stop the GOP's lurch to the right. Conservatives who had sneered at their party's moderates started sucking up to them. Then-Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott magnanimously gave Pennsylvania centrist Arlen Specter a special seat at his leadership meetings. Some moderates said alarmed conservatives went so far as to shower them with physical affection. "I've never had so many conservatives come up to me, put their arms around me and tell me how much they love me," one House moderate told the Washington Post.

In subsequent months, the moderates in the Senate flexed their newfound muscle. In the spring of 2003, for instance, the moderates pared down a proposed $726 billion tax cut to less than half that size, a figure Bush complained was "itty-bitty." In the next Congress, as the Republicans clung to a precarious 51-49 advantage, the moderates not only derailed the GOP budget but also pushed through the intelligence reforms recommended by the Sept. 11 commission over conservatives' objections.

But the 2004 elections were a tolling bell for the moderates. The Republicans now have a 55-45 Senate advantage, which means that on straight up-or-down votes requiring a simple majority, Senate Republican leader Bill Frist can afford to lose up to five members of his flock?-all he needs is 50 votes to hand the ball off to tie-breaker Dick Cheney. Given that only the Fantastic Four are reliable dissidents, Frist is almost never under the 50-vote mark. Other GOP senators make occasional cameos as single-issue moderates: Ohio's George Voinovich on the deficit; Pennsylvania's Arlen Specter on abortion; Oregon's Gordon Smith on health care; Nebraska's Chuck Hagel and Indiana's Richard Lugar on foreign affairs. But it's rare for more than one of these senators to gang up with the Fantastic Four.

Now that the moderates can rarely help Democrats engineer a winning vote, their influence over Republican legislation is shrinking. Rather than chopping tax cuts in half, their latest protest led to a Senate budget featuring $70 billion in tax cuts, compared to Bush's $100 billion request. And when negotiations with the House are finished, Bush will likely get almost everything he wants. The moderates aren't getting as much love these days from the other side of the aisle, either. Here their problem is that the Republican majority isn't quite large enough to give them sway over the Senate filibuster. Harry Reid and the Democrats only need 41 votes to sustain a filibuster and stop Republicans from bringing a bill to a vote. That means Reid can survive the loss of four fellow Democrats before he needs to call in the mod squad.

But it's not just math that has defanged the moderates. Their decline also has to do with the escalating level of hostility between the parties. For much of Bush's first term, both Democrats and Republicans on Capitol Hill talked the talk of compromise. Now that impulse is way out of style. Bush aggressively campaigned against several centrist Democrats, knocking them out of Congress and convincing others that working with Republicans wouldn't protect them. At the same time Congress' consummate dealmaker, Louisiana Democrat John Breaux, retired. As a result, Senate Democrats are as unified as they've been in years. Although they have splintered some on second-tier votes like class-action lawsuit and bankruptcy reform, their near-perfect cohesion on Social Security shows that they're hanging together when it counts. Olympia Snowe is chairing a Senate Centrist Coalition to hash out a compromise Social Security plan, but Democrats won't bite.

The ultimate defeat of the moderates, however, would be the successful activation of the nuclear option. Scuttling the filibuster for judicial nominees is an affront to everything the moderates have tried to promote: bipartisanship, compromise, and a check on the right wing's excesses. So far, the moderates' refusal to play along?-along with the nervousness of traditionalists like Virginia's John Warner about the long-term effects on the Senate?-have made it extremely difficult for Frist to corral the necessary votes. But the Republicans are close, and if Frist find a way to drop the Bomb, the moderates' lack of clout will be proved. And in the all-out partisan warfare that would be sure to follow?-call it nuclear winter?-they'd be stuck in a bleak no-man's land. If that happens, it'll be enough to make the Fantastic Four wish they really were in a comic book.


Michael Crowley is a senior editor at the New Republic.
0 Replies
 
Phoenix32890
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Mar, 2005 02:58 pm
Lola- Here is the link to the article:

http://neuroethics.upenn.edu/terri.html
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Mar, 2005 04:18 pm
Poor Jeb, his God fearing decent Christian supporters are turning on him over this. He can't do anything else. He's stuck between a rock and a hard place.

These same God fearing folks are giving Judge Greer, a Christian, Conservative, Republican Baptist death threats. I'm sure Jesus is pleased.

Do I have to go to heaven with all these cranky types?
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Mar, 2005 04:25 pm
It's more like "nut cases." Unfortunately, both sides has them.
0 Replies
 
panzade
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Mar, 2005 04:29 pm
The fantastic four was a fascinating article.

The feature on Delay and his father? A little bit of a stretch to call him a hypocrite on pulling the plug. One can't know how he felt when the family gathered around his father. Perhaps he was outvoted. Glass is half full.

Finally. Reading Raspberry and Buckley in the op-ed today one can see that the conservatives are practicing damage control.Both columnists wheezed that congressional meddling was ill advised and I had to agree with Raspberry who noticed that the case isn't just about a lone woman and pulling the plug. It's about the struggle between right to lifers and the abortion on demand advocates. For as Raspberry says:"If right to lifers agreed with letting Terry expire they'd be on a slippery slope in the abortion struggle.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Mar, 2005 04:34 pm
While the rest of the American citizens who with proper care can lead a reasonably good future life... Instead, this administration has chosen to make an issue of one life that has no future potential. If "one life is important," it seems their efforts are misguided at best. Why aren't they fightinng for the rest of America?
0 Replies
 
panzade
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Mar, 2005 04:40 pm
blueveinedthrobber wrote:
Advance Politician to English translation

"I've milked this issue of the last drop of political gain, and it may even be at a point where it will backfire on me so it's everybody out of the pool and good luck and God speed uh, uh, uh, what was that girls name again?"l


Jeb's too green to run in '08....but he's learning.
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Mar, 2005 04:43 pm
panzade wrote:
blueveinedthrobber wrote:
Advance Politician to English translation

"I've milked this issue of the last drop of political gain, and it may even be at a point where it will backfire on me so it's everybody out of the pool and good luck and God speed uh, uh, uh, what was that girls name again?"l


Jeb's too green to run in '08....but he's learning.


Jeb running in 08 had nothing to do with my post....and if Delay can't remember how he felt about honoring his dad's wishes and apply that to Schiavo...if Delay can't remember that his family sued when trying to pass legislation to stop such suits and talking about them like they're the ruination of the country, then perhaps if nothing else he's too stupid to be in a position of great authority.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Mar, 2005 04:50 pm
blue, I came to the same conclusion about DeLay after learning from constituents in Texas that he is rather dumb. People laughed and cried at the same time, because of how he managed to achieve such a high place in our federal government.
0 Replies
 
panzade
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Mar, 2005 05:04 pm
blueveinedthrobber wrote:
Jeb running in 08 had nothing to do with my post....

Didn't imply that it did.
0 Replies
 
panzade
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Mar, 2005 05:05 pm
cicerone imposter wrote:
People laughed and cried at the same time, because of how he managed to achieve such a high place in our federal government.

There's a couple of other guys I can think of that fit this description.
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Mar, 2005 05:15 pm
Delay and the two Bushes, in a sane environment, would be shovelling chickenshit out of cages, or doing time for petty larceny. No way they would be leaders.
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Mar, 2005 05:16 pm
panzade wrote:
blueveinedthrobber wrote:
Jeb running in 08 had nothing to do with my post....

Didn't imply that it did.


I must've misunderstood you then. I was puzzled as why you would have made that connection. Now I know why. You didn't.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2026 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 03/01/2026 at 10:18:06