the Greater Nomadic Council

Delaying the Inevitable?

As the blog's proprietor notes, activity is light due to academic obligations on the part of most contributors. So it seems this is the perfect opportunity for those of us for whom "reading" and "education" are wastes of time invented by the Left to trick you into submitting to their mind control to make a contribution. So despite my lack of blogging here going back almost a year I thought I might try my hand at it until the lefties return to continue their brainwash regimen.

Two thoughts on the DeLay imbroglio. Santorum's comments on "This Week" are the latest sign that deep below the surface there is unrest among members of the GOP with DeLay. Yet the line that is being repeated over and over is the fact that Reps. Pelosi and Rahm Emanuel and the entire Democrat establishment are heavily targeting DeLay for removal is actually bolstering DeLay's support among GOP House members and party leaders. As Bob Novak notes in his column of today:

Ironically, this campaign's intensity may protect DeLay from Republicans who in their secret hearts would like to see the sometimes-overbearing Texan fall. No GOP politician wants to be the handmaiden of DeLay's Democratic detractors. Last Wednesday's closed-door caucus of House Republicans gave DeLay a standing ovation.

So Republicans don't want to help the Dem's succeed at ousting DeLay. But more than that, the implication seems to be that a successful attack on DeLay equals a successful attack on the current Congressional hegemony of the GOP. Yesterday the Washington Post reports, "These officials said they believe the attacks are part of a strategy by Democrats, aided by watchdog groups funded by liberals, to use the ethics process to try to regain power."

My question is this: Putting aside for a moment any concerns about morality or ethics and thinking in terms of pure strategy, does DeLay's ouster really translate into a detriment to the GOP? If every time a news story comes out that gives the appearance of unethical behavior on the part of Delay, Republican members respond with unwavering loyalty to the Leader, are they really helping themselves? I am not sure that a successful "hit" on a single member by the opposition translates into overall negative electoral results for the GOP at the national level. Without a doubt it is a trophy that Pelosi can hang proudly and prominently in her office. Daschle was such a trophy for the GOP last year. But there is a difference. Daschle was defeated over an issue: the judicial filibuster. This was an issues the entire Democratic caucus was a party to. And Daschle has become a depressing reminder to electorally vulnerable Democratic Senators that they should tread carefully when it comes to opposing President Bush's nominees.

If DeLay were demoted (or, and this seems entirely unlikely, not reelected) he would simply become a symbol for what happens when one behaves unethically. Republican members would simply need to distance themselves from him and avoid the appearance that they put principle over party.

My second DeLay related thought has to do with media bias. I have noticed that the press has done their best to conflate DeLay's ethical . . . ahem . . . lapses with his ideology. This is namely in regard to his comments on judiciary. The Post gives us this:

The comments by Shays and Santorum came amid growing signs of waning support from DeLay's friends. President Bush, Vice President Cheney and Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) all have taken more moderate positions than DeLay on restraining federal judges. On Friday, when Bush was asked about DeLay's comments that judges are out of control and should be held accountable, the president replied that he believes in "an independent judiciary." He said nothing about DeLay.

The fact of the matter is that if DeLay gets taken down it will be because of concerns about his ethics not concerns that he is too far to the right or too radical when it comes to the judiciary.