Tom DeLay wants to define good behavior. Don’t take my word for it. Read Tom “I am the Federal Government” DeLay’s words for yourself in this morning’s L.A. Times article, DeLay Criticizes Justice Kennedy:
However, DeLay has called repeatedly for the House to find a way to hold the federal judiciary accountable for its decisions. “The judiciary has become so activist and so isolated from the American people that it’s our job to do that,” DeLay said.
One way would be for the House Judiciary Committee to investigate the clause in the Constitution that says “judges can serve as long as they serve with good behavior,” he said. “We want to define what good behavior means. And that’s where you have to start.”
Is there a Jewish word for cosmic chutzpah? Have we given Tom DeLay enough rope yet Sen. Reid? Is it OK to call out the Democratic political lynch mob? To be fair, DeLay has a perfect insanity defense. I don’t know how anyone can argue that Tom DeLay is not completely unhinged from reality.
In my first Bush and DeLay and Frist, Oh My! post, I argued that Bush and DeLay and Frist are “the Republican triumvirate that will emerge as either the Three Musketeers or The Three Stooges of the Republican party. Which one is largely up to the Democratic party.”
Now that Tom DeLay has actually propsed that the House Judiciary Committee, i.e. Tom DeLay, should rewrite the Constitution to define what good behavior means, the same argument makes even more sense:
“Democrats can seize the opportunity to brand the Republican party as corrupt religious fanatics hell bent on destruction of our Constitution and our economy or allow them to seize the high moral ground as defenders of moral values and the American way of life.
Bush and DeLay and Frist. The triumvirate that will be the albatross and the anvil of the Republican party if Democrats can demonstrate a little spinal fortitude.”
Is there a chiropractor in the house?