Considering Obama’s positions on many issues… I would say DeLay is spot on.
Former House Republican Leader Tom DeLay (Texas) called Barack Obama a “Marxist” on the Mike Gallagher radio show Thursday.
Explaining that Obama clinching the Democratic nomination is a good thing for John McCain, DeLay said Obama’s “weakness” is that “nobody knows him.”
“And if McCain does not define him as what he is — hey, I have said publicly, and I will again, that unless he proves me wrong, he is a Marxist,” DeLay said.
The radio host agreed with DeLay, who is facing money laundering, charges [and will never go to trial because the charges are bogus --ed.] saying Obama is “desperately trying to cover up what seems to be the kind of old school Marxist radical liberal failed ideology.”
“Absolutely,” DeLay said. “No doubt about it.”
Tags: Tom DeLay
June 8th, 2008
As can be plainly seen on the sidebar of my blog, I am not by any stretch of the imagination a fan of John McCain. While he is right with regard to most of the major issues of defense and the prosecution of the war on radical Islam (save for wanting to close down Club Gitmo), he has been wrong on so many domestic issues, from his “Gang of 14″ megalomaniacal episode; to his penchant for amnesty for illegals a-la McCain-Kennedy, to his full frontal assault on the First Amendment with the advent of McCain-Feingold.
While his overtures at CPAC may be considered a start to healing the rift with movement conservatives, much is yet required in the way of action before movement conservatives will trust that he will indeed carry the conservative mantle to the White House on January 20, 2009.
Yet, credit must be given where credit is due. For instance, McCain’s opposition to the big government behemoth created by the Bush administration (one of my few areas of disagreement with the President), otherwise known as the prescription drug benefit for seniors.
Today, Tom DeLay, whom I at one time defended to the hilt, attacked McCain for not being liberal enough:
Washington (CNSNews.com) - Former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay criticized likely Republican presidential nominee John McCain - and by extension some of the more conservative members of Congress - by calling McCain’s 2003 vote against the Medicare prescription drug plan a non-conservative vote.
DeLay made his remarks in an interview with Cybercast News Service at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) in Washington, D.C., on Saturday.
While in Congress, DeLay had helped quashed a rebellion by House conservatives, who tried to defeat the prescription plan then being promoted by President Bush.
“I’m very proud of the Medicare bill,” DeLay told Cybercast News Service. “… We took a welfare state program and applied conservative principles to it.” Listen to Audio
Asked if McCain’s vote against the Medicare expansion bill was un-conservative, DeLay responded, “Yes, it was, as a matter of fact. It was taking the easy way out.”
Mr. DeLay, just which conservative principles were applied to the Medicare Prescription Drug bill? You can’t take the greatest expansion of a government program in the recent history of these United States and call it “conservative” any more than you can take a pig, apply lipstick on it, and call it Bo Derek. Calling the Medicare Prescription Drug benefit “conservative” is not only balls-on intellectually dishonest, but in fact requires a suspension of disbelief so enormous as to make it an exercise in futility.
There are plenty of issues for conservatives to disagree with John McCain.
This isn’t one of them.
Tags: President Bush, Tom DeLay
February 11th, 2008
We’ve had quite a day today. It started with President George W. Bush’s speech, dark and early at 7:15 a.m. It was a great speech, one that ought to be called his Conservative State of the Union. I have no doubt that history will look back on Bush’s presidency and acknowledge all the good he did for our country and the world.
Later in the morning Mark and I had a breakfast chat with Robert Stacy McCain, co-author of Donkey Cons, who blogs over at The Other McCain. He endorsed our book, Caucus of Corruption.
In the afternoon we had a meeting with former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, a great American and conservative leader. Mark and I were very grateful he was able to take some time out of his schedule to meet with us. As you know, Tom DeLay also endorsed our book. It was a nice meeting, we talked politics and about the presidential race. It was a very nice meeting, and we are both glad we finally got to meet him in person. It is a shame how the Democrats smeared him.
It was a busy day, and it’s still not over yet. We’ll be heading out in a little while, but I did want to give everyone an update.
UPDATE: I forgot to mention that I was interviewed yesterday by MarketWatch…
Tags: blogs, President Bush, Tom DeLay
February 8th, 2008
An interesting revelation…
Democratic U.S. Sen. Max Baucus, who is running for his sixth term next year, didn’t own a home in Montana for 11 years of his 29-year Senate career.
State Republicans say Baucus has become a full-time Washington, D.C., politician who no longer really lives in Montana. They say the issue will come up in the upcoming campaign.
Baucus now owns one-half of his mother’s Helena home, and Baucus and his wife, Wanda, are listed on the home’s title as owners, records show.
Baucus spokesman Barrett Kaiser said the senator has always considered the house where he grew up “home” and returns at least twice a month.
“He’s called it home for as long as he can remember,” Kaiser said. “It’s the house where his son comes to visit his grandmother and it’s likely where Max’s grandchildren will come, too.”
Chris Wilcox, executive director of the Montana Republican Party, said it’s wonderful that Baucus comes back to Montana to visit his mother, but said it’s not the same thing as actually living here.
“The rest of our congressional delegation still keep their lives here, their families, their business operations” he said. “I think that’s an important difference.”
The issue of residency has certainly come up in the past and has been used by both Democrats and Republicans. When Mitt Romney ran for governor of Massachusetts, his Democrat opponents saw the threat he was and tried to claim he wasn’t a legitimate resident of Massachusetts, because he had been living temporarily in Utah while he was running the Olympics. Hillary Clinton chose an easily winnable state (New York) to move to in order to run for the Senate. After Tom DeLay retired from the House, Democrats sought (successfully) to keep him on the ballot in Texas despite the fact he had established residency in Virginia — never mind the fact he dropped out of the race.
How will this play out? Considering how rarely Democrats are held accountable for their corruption, I have little faith that a question of residency will actually do much harm to Baucus’s reelection efforts.
Tags: 2008 Campaign, Max Baucus, residency, Tom DeLay
November 20th, 2007
