| took it a an unprecented level. |
Hardly unprecedented. If it was in fact as you characterize it, it may have been small potatoes compared to what went on at times in the past. Until Watergate, our media pretty much ignored all the shit going on under the table & behind closed doors. Once destroying politicians became the journalistic sport of choice, "suddenly" all kinds of evil things were happening. (An aside - because the first one so destroyed was a Republican, the media have since had a collective mindset much more suspicious of wrongdoing in Republican circles than in Democrat, but I digress.)
| Just so we're clear, are you defending Tom DeLay? Are you saying that more times than not, he had his constituent's best interest in mind? |
No, I'm saying he probably had his constituents' best interest in mind about as often as, say, Lyndon Johnson, perhaps more often. Not being from DeLay's district, however, I can't comment one way or the other with authority. DeLay
may be crooked as hell, but Johnson would have dismissed him as a rank amateur in the excercise of political muscle, would've walked all over him, never mind all the "hammer" talk, which was just the media's way of demonizing him. I'm saying none of us know just yet, me included. And that the distinction between good and evil is likely to be more political than legal. You've clearly convicted him in your mind already, based only on the media's reporting, the presumption of innocence being a quaint historical curiosity to most liberals these days. If he's found guilty of crimes, let him reap his justly earned rewards. If he acted in good faith and is found innocent, what a shame he was brought down by baseless innuendo and the vendetta of a local prosecutor obsessed with nailing him at any cost for political reasons. The rough and tumble of politics is ugly, and what goes around
always comes around.
