How nuts is this guy????
First he mouths off re the court's decision declining to review the Schiavo case (totally within their rights to do) with dark threats about judges having to "answer for their behavior"; called on this, he "apologizes" saying he spoke in an "inartful way". Putting aside for a moment I don't think that's even a word, I know that's not an apology!
Now, for s***s and giggles apparently, he is suggesting the House investigate the clause in the Constitution that says "judges can serve as long as they serve with good behavior. We want to define what good behavior means."
We've gone this far without having to expand on the definition, now this venal, corrupt little man means to go messing around with the Constitution? And oh yeah, let's have someone who has been reprimanded 3 times for his ethical lapses, and is currently under investigation for corruption advise us all on the finer points of behavior among public officials.
I know people say that DeLay is no worse (high bar, that) than Wright or Baker. Won't get into that argument, but the difference here I don't recall either of those gents wearing their piety on their sleeves.
I imagine the WH is furious with DeLay, who up to now has been very effective. Now he is becoming the poster boy for insider corruption and the arrogance of power.
Bookmarks