I Wonder Where Is the Office Of Getting One’s Reputation Back and other issues
Aug 21st, 2010 by David Anderson
Former House Republican leader, Tom Delay was cleared of all federal charges and the state prosecutor who shopped for a pliable grand jury after repeated turn-downs, refused Delay’s pleas for a trial. He knew Delay was not guilty and couldn’t figure out a way to convict him. Making him wait 4 years with no end in sight violates the Constitution’s guarantee of a speedy trial.
I examined the charges and evidence against Tom Delay 5 years ago and predicted that he would be cleared. I condemned the Republican cave in to make an indictment not a conviction the standard for removing people automatically from leadership without even having a hearing or right to appeal to one’s colleagues. It was all about justice. Allowing the executive branch to be the sole determiner of legislative leadership with a standard as flimsy as an indictment is an affront to division of powers, any notion of justice, and the ability of the people to have stable and independent representatives. An indictment is a one sided accusation with a very low bar of proof.
I have no problem with a legislative ethics committee conducting its own investigation. It would be clear that a difference existed to the public between a guy with unexplainable cash in the freezer and a guy who is indicted under a law that wasn’t even passed when the alleged activity took place. We should have an allegiance to truth.
I think the problem is that the public has bought into cynicism over the hard work of seeking justice. ” They are all crooks”, we are told. When we accept that lie, we create an environment which is toxic. Good people are not honored, but are subject to having their reputations destroyed in the politics of personal destruction. Crooks are not held to any real standard because they are seen as lovable rouges–at least they aren’t hypocrites. The people become represented by the colorful not the intellectual. Politics becomes a game where we always lose. Every action in normal life becomes twisted. We no longer try to find solutions for our problems. We think there are none. We, therefore, allow government to degrade into a spoils system. Government becomes about what the faction in control of it can take from the faction that doesn’t. Since we no longer have faith in the ability to have a just, free, and prosperous society, we just go for spreading the wealth around. We fear making sacrifices because there is no faith that it is just not another excuse to redistrube the spoils to others.
The media bears its share of blame. The media plays up the drama, but does not finish the story when people are cleared. Are we to believe the public doesn’t want to know how a case ends? We know people always want to know the rest of the story. What is the real agenda? At least Blago got pretty good publicity with the turn down of 23 of 24 counts. Delay did not get anywhere near it on the complete dismissal. The attack on Delay was politically motivated and publizing his innocence endangers that same agenda.
Tom Delay was far from perfect. I find a lot of fault with his buying into the mentality that Democrats did it so now it is our turn to get the perks from allowing the paying lobbyists to write bills with the people shut out, reward friends with earmarks, and forget about many of the substantive process reforms considered important. I think Delay helped create some of the cynicism which undid him. Still, the facts are the facts. The man had a raw deal and someone needs to stand up and say enough. It is hard to risk criticism by defending imperfect people base upon high principle. The tendency is to run and hide. I refuse to do so. We need to restore a standard of justice. I will stand for truth and justice today, tomorrow, and as long as I have breath.
In that same vein, I stand by Frank and his principled stand for the Constitutional rights of all Americans to build a religious building on property they lawfully obtain. Constitutional rights are not about feelings being hurt. They are about who we are as a society. Now that I have reaffirmed my stand for the rights of Muslim Americans in Manhattan, I have to ask when is the Greek Orthodox Church going to be allowed to be rebuilt? When is the religious apartheid and bigotry against Orthodox Christianity going to be condemned? Why does one group get every waiver in the book and another get every roadblock in the book? Where was the media attention to conservative Christians having to fight government bureaucracies again and again when they wish to build churches? Why is Reverend Franklin Graham too controversial to lead a voluntary prayer service in the Pentagon, but an imam, who wants Americans to respect Sharia law more , is sent at taxpayer expense to represent the United States while he is in the middle of fundraiser? My problem is not in allowing one group to be free. My problem is in the oppression of Christian views. Let freedom ring not just for one, but for all.
This blog was sited by a Hispanic rights advocate to a newspaper reporter as an example of promoting attitudes which could lead to violence against Latinos. This is strange considering we reject violence, racism, and xenophobia. What was the example sited? We favor the Arizona Immigration Law because it deports criminals and makes Americans safer. In response to that position a comment was made by our friend Rick which was rejected by us suggested getting people in a pick up truck to round people up. The author of the post (which was Tennessee) rejected that point of view. I expressed my dismay immediately on that post and another one where the issue came up. Somehow the comment was conflated beyond its scope and the fact that we vigorously rejected it as a dangerous image and dangerous to the civil rights of Americans seemed lost on the activist. The fact that we engaged in a discussion was seen as dangerous. It seems the newspaper got it. They may understand freedom of speech considering that they are the in the free speech business. We shall see.
I stand by Tennessee Walker’s decision to allow the freedom to speak one’s views. We believe in the solution to a bad idea is to examine it and offer good ideas. It is not suppression. Let’s take a broader look at the principle of engagement over censorship and forget about that one comment. Ideas that are suppressed do not go away. Moderate Muslims have tried that technique for decades. They decided ignore the extremists. The result has been that the ideas which went unchallenged are now threatening the image of the entire religion. Pedophile priests were hidden to avoid hurting the reputation of the Catholic Church, the cover up was worse. On the other hand, Pentacostal Christianity suffered through some sex scandals of some of its leaders in the late 1980′s. It did not hide from the discussion. We engaged in a public discussion about accountability, redemption, and restoration. The movement is stronger today than ever. Hitler was ignored by the ruling class. They thought they could use him. He ended up being the one winning. Am I comparing that comment to any of those examples? No. What I am saying is that if we speak enough all of us express good and bad ideas. We should not be afraid of a vigorous discussion. It is the only way to sort out good ideas from bad.
I see the attack on us as evidence of our effectiveness. We are the most popular voice in the state which is taking a pro-legal and anti-illegal immigration stand. We have to be checked so others don’t start standing up. Some legislators have said no one wants to touch the tough issue of immigration because they fear it. I can see why. It does not matter that you take a reasoned approach to the subject. Any thing that can be found to undermine the case for enforcing America’s laws is used regardless of context or the facts surrounding it. It is in my view an attempt to silence us. We will not be silent. We will continue to put out ideas for discussion. We will continue to stand for the Civil Rights of all Americans and residents of America. We will also continue to stand for the rule of law. Open borders are a threat to the security and stability of America. We have to gain a more orderly approach to immigration so people are able to enjoy and contribute legally and openly. We need to know who is here and show no tolerance to criminal elements. Obey our laws or go home. Is that too radical for polite society? If it is, we are in more trouble than even I thought.
Yes David
The media does bear much of the blame for the problem of character assassination. Many good men and women that would become wonderful legislators will not run for office because of this problem.
As much as I would like to unload the blame totally on the media, I can’t. The media would not be effective in demonizing honorable people unless we the citizens bought into it.
The media’s business is to make money and the way they do that is to have great ratings. Smut and character assassination sells and ups the ratings and earns more advertising dollars.
I also agree with Tennessee Walker with our right to free speech and the right to politically express our differing beliefs. But as media, we bear a heavy responsibility to not cross the line and use our craft as a tool to destroy innocent people.
We should never make it personal when reporting for a newspaper or even in the position of a powerful blog website. Newspapers have a “ombudsman,” to keep a check on that type of thing, but we should temper ourselves and use prudence as our tool, least we injure people before they have even been charged by our legal system.
I am not preaching here but we bear a real responsibility and I thank David for reminding us in this heated election cycle.
The problem will exist as long as people have a right to free speech. I will add once again that with that very broad First Amendment right come an even heavier responsiblity of using common sense.
Thank You for your posting David
You are welcome and thanks for your comments.
David, Delay’s situation is worthy of a post. I am however dismayed that this blog’s encouragement of debate was turned against us.
For the purposes of our readers David typically gives editorial control to the individual who makes the post. Thus if somone strays from the guidelines and it is not corrected, it is usually the post initiator who is at fault and not David.
The post in question is here:
http://www.delawarepolitics.net/so-enforcing-the-law-actually-works/
All are welcome to view the exchange. All are welcome to read the link I provided about the success of the Arizona Law.
I am sure that what got us in trouble was the comments made by Rick in comment 1. David and I both gently chided Rick but this did not work. Eventually I made my own statement which can be found on comment 16. Here is part of what I said:
“…….With all that being said, I don’t care for Rick’s Imagery of 5 guys with shotguns at the Circle In Georgetown from comment 1 . I think this statement is not good for this debate nor my position in this debate. I think the Imagery of Rick’s statement is abhorrent as it ignores the historic nature of 5 guys with shotguns in a pickup in the Civil Rights History of this Nation from the 1920′s to 1960′s.
David and I gently chided Rick for this at the time. Hopefully, rick will get it that using provacative Imagery can actually hurt what may be an intellectually defensible argument. Having read much of Rick’s comments over time I do think this comment is hyperbole. David and I do think that those who make comments should be judged on the basis of their comments first and foremost. In a forum as open as this one is, we are confident that the flaws in the arguments or even the style of someone can be exposed by the intelligent viewers of this blog.”
It is obvious that no one in the group that is denigrating us bothered to read the above.
Both David and myself are committed to the view that our readers can read, comment, and discern the truth.
It is not easy discerning when a commenter has passed the line into violating our rules.
The Truth is: That’s Life.
It is obvious that no one in the group that is denigrating us bothered to read the above.. TW
It’s also obvious that you bring this ancient history up because you can’t take the heat of being criticized by me, and others, as being a liberal country-club Republican- so you prove it by playing the tried-and-true liberals’ card of choice; the threat of censorship.
Thanks for proving my point.
Actually David and TW – thank you for that commentary.
and while I am provocative myself and do get rude….What Rick said and that rhetoric actually hurts the cause you both espouse and your blog here….because it taints you and makes you guilty by association.
It should have been removed and not tolerated – much as you removed my very rude comment about Christine – and I take no umbrage with that. Because by leaving it there does give the impression that you, on some level tolerate that idea.
We do need a solution to our immigration and border problem – it does need to be addressed and fixed – but in a humane and sensible way that respects the diginity if the people involved as well as the diginity and respect we all have for the rights and protection given all residents of these United States.
we have no way to know if Rick will act out on his rhetoric – no way at all – but I will tell you – if he does there is a jail cell waiting for him and so many charges filed, that if convicted he will never be a free man – and he needs to take that under thoughtful consideration.
to do less would show us all as hypocrites. So yes, again, thank you for a measured and respectful commentary
Well, ap, I had no desire to seem like I was throwing TW under the bus because I agree that his decision was sound. If it were my post, it would have disappeared very quietly and quickly unless I did not catch it before it got too much attention. I think it would have been to Rick’s benefit not just ours. He is a good guy and I would not want him judged for his worst moment out of hundreds of comments. Still his views are his own and he is willing to stand by them. I lot of people know who he is. I give him credit for that. I tend to draw the line slightly differently for anonymous attacks.
The truth is there is a large portion (1/3 of the public) who favor large scale deportations. I find that impractical and disruptive. I think it is beneficial to the discussion to think about what that would look like. You would have to call out the militia or have posse groups assisting law enforcement to move out 20 million people. Since some are citizens such as children born in families of illegals, it would create a civil rights nightmare. It would disrupt the economy. It would be a black eye on America’s place in the world.
I do not mind having that debate. A far better way is to cut the money magnet and secure the border. People will deport themselves in an orderly way and law enforcement could focus on the criminal element.
Rick, it is old but the complaint that we are trying to stir up violence was presented this past Thursday. The issue came up 3 days ago. Otherwise, we would not even discuss it again. I refused to give any contact information on you. I say let it die. If you want, I could give them your email.
Fine, but I wouldn’t give the pathetic ‘stirring up violence’ crowd the time of day. It is a mere ruse, like Pelosi wanting to ‘investigate’ who is ‘funding opposition to the mosque.’
I forgot..
..we have no way to know if Rick will act out on his rhetoric – no way at all – but I will tell you – if he does there is a jail cell waiting for him and so many charges filed…Apo Whatever
Not if I’m part of an authorized, well-regulated militia, moron.
As I recall the thread, the context was ‘how could we register all of the illegal aliens,’ or something along those lines.
What method did FDR use against Japanese citizens? Oh yeah, concentration camps.
Rick – I can not and will not engage in a battle of wits
with an unarmed man..
you have not idea of the trouble you have brought to David and this blog
sadly, – although I disagree with some of their stances I support their caring and concern for the humanity and dignity of all people regardless of status
they have tried to give you a forum to speak your ideas – and have been overly generous – you have endangered them – I welcome debate but you have crossed the line
stay within the boundries of fair play and do not damage this blog further with your militia nonsense – and 5 guys in a truck with shotguns
you want to insult me – go ahead – I know who you are and wont out you here either call me a moron idiot of what ever – why woulld I care – your opinion of me irrelevant – but dont damage David and what he is trying to do here – and while I will trade insults and he doesn;t like what I say for the most part he is respectful and thoughful and TW as well
but know this – I write and effect governmental policy – and creatures like you have to live with them
enjoy it!!
Oh and you will never have the ability to be part od said militia
they will never be activated and your background disqualifies you
yes, I do know about you
If ‘brevity is the soul of wit,’ where does that leave you?
“..you want to insult me – go ahead – I know who you are and wont out you here either call me a moron idiot....blah, blah, blah”..Apo Whatever
You are the rudest participant on the forum, and everybody knows it- quit pontificating.
Bye-the-way- here is my response on the thread in question to your query;
Apo: “Rick – are you inciting violence and encouraging others to take the law into their own hands – in other words – vigilanteism?? mob rule??? lynch mobs??”
Rick: “No- a sworn militia enforcing the laws that BO and the feds won’t.”
“Enforcing the laws.” That certainly doesn’t include randomly shooting people, and I never made any such suggestion. It does mean effecting citizenship investigations, as per federal law.
LOL – nice try on the walk back Rick – but apparently now you all will be tried in the court of public opinion
some may agree with mass deportations not understaning the idea of due proess of law and the costs involved
the rest will be horrified by your imagery of “5 guys with shotguns in the back of a pickup -rounding up illegals in the circle in Georgetown” – regardless of your attempt to walk back your comments
you made the bed – now you get to lay in it
your inslt are useless and just continue to make you look bad – LOL
your inslt are useless and just continue to make you look bad – LOL
Rick….need to watch your insits. They have been getting out of hand.
And you’re right about this poster being the rudest on this board. Mean, nasty, terribly unhappy. I almost feel sorry for her.
LOL – nice try on the walk back Rick…Apo Whatever
Nice try on ignoring my comment, posted way before the controversy;
Apo: “Rick – are you inciting violence…vigilanteism?? mob rule??? lynch mobs??”
Rick: “No-….
Last time I checked, ‘No’ is rather unambiguous. Sorry to let facts get in the way of your witchhunt.
you still suggested 5 guys with shotguns in the back of pick up truck – it was not until you were confronted that all of a sudden you suggested a militia
would that be like the Michigian militia – all arrested and now in prision
you just cannot face the fact – you got caught inciting violence against a group of people….bottom line and the more you deny – the funnier it is…the stuck pig squeals the loudest
deal with those chickens coming home to roost – this is Sussex ocunty after all
Pat Fish – go back under your rock – in your christian church..I mean doesn’t Christianity advocate welcoming for the stranger?? and human rights – didn’t see much about immigration law last time I read it….and I at least have never incited violence against anybody.
and I don’t write the things I do – then run and hide behind the bible….
Long before you chimed in, and long before the controversy- from the original thread:
Question: Instead of 5 guys with shotguns, Rick, can we just have enforcement by the Delaware State Police around the Circle in Georgetown?
My response:
Sure, we could, TW. But remember, the left likes to promote the notion that authorities would be ‘overwhelmed,’ that we just couldn’t round-up all of the illegal invaders.
Well, citizen-deputies would solve that ‘problem.’
Last time I checked ’round-up’ is not synonymous with shooting. Isn’t objective reality a bitch?
Objective reality – HMMMMM – I never said anything about “shooting” – if I did, show us all the quote – not once – not ever…….
I did say you were inciting violence and threatening to “round up people with 5 guys in a pickup truck with shotguns”, is at least – disturbing imagery
Using a firearm in the commission of a crime is a felony – its was only later that you mentioned a militia – but no thought or comment as to whom was going to sanction that militia..
so you have lost that one – keep talking Rick – you’re only digging the hole deeper – you are on the defensive and its an obvious as can be.
BTW – you looked the fool in today’s News Journal article – hope you are happy now – like I said – court of public opinion and all that – you damaged this blog – David has had to walk back alot of things to justify why he left your post up and removed others he felt were “evil”
Now David is defending his decision to not remove your post and working for Urquhart’s campaign – wonder how the article will go over with Glen?
LOL
I have explained my intent, with quotes from the original thread.
Feel free to keep foaming-at-the-mouth.
Oh Rick dear – let’s play truth – shall we???
here is the discussion again…..for those that missed it – you were not and will not be supported on this blog for your thoughts – and words – nor deeds:
1. Rick
For years the amnesty crowd has said that one can’t get rid of the millions of illegal aliens in our midst..
Try a pickup truck with five guys with shotguns in the back…
“Let’s take us a little ride to the circle….”
2. David
I don’t even want to ask what Rick means. I guess ignorance is bliss.
3. Rick
I don’t even want to ask what Rick means. I guess ignorance is bliss.
Let me fill you in…’the circle’ is in Georgetown and ‘illegal aliens’ are criminals. Get it?
4. anon
Well, citizen-deputies would solve that ‘problem.’
And create a bunch of new problems.
Self-deportation is so much nicer.
5. David Anderson
I tend to let authors control their own post. TW rebutted it with his point of view and I mine. He is not inciting violence to propose rounding people up. I think he is dead wrong, it is vigilantism and can only cause problems. On that issue we have to strongly disagree with his approach.
still, initially David tried to stick his head in the sand…then you Rick called him out – however, I posted a rather (funny) but mean personal commentary on O’Donnell and it was removed – so we leave the incitement of violence open to discussion…but remove a toungue in cheek, albeit mean, but peaceful personal comment
makes you wonder – does Glen support that behaviour?
and David – really – you contradict yourself here – below is your quote:
“He is not inciting violence to propose rounding people up. I think he is dead wrong, it is vigilantism and can only cause problems”
Vigilantism, in and of itself, is violent and you yourself admit it can only cause problems
but then above it you say he is not inciting violence – how not so??
I did very well in my logic/philosophy classes in college – and I can see the major flaws with your statement above
Rick either is, or is not inciting violence – and in the totality of the context – he is, and even you know that.
This thread gettin’ some ink in the News Journal, with Rick and David actually named:
http://www.delawareonline.com/article/20100824/NEWS01/8240340/Intricacy-of-hate-makes-crimes-hard-to-classify
saw that this AM – nice way to get noticed – and regardless of the saying….. – in truth
not all publicity is good publicity……….OUCH!