Thursday, April 14, 2005

DeLay Rejects Right to Privacy

Tom DeLay gave a pen and paper sit down with reporters yesterday. During the interview, Mr. DeLay declares there is no constitutional separation of church and state. Mr. DeLay declares there should be not right of judicial review. And, my favorite, that the only reason Americans have a right of privacy is because Congress didn't stand up to the courts.

Mr. Dinan: You've been talking about going after activist judges since at least 1997. The [Terri] Schiavo case gives you a chance to do that, but you've recently said you blame Congress for not being zealous in oversight.
Mr. DeLay: Not zealous. I blame Congress over the last 50 to 100 years for not standing up and taking its responsibility given to it by the Constitution. The reason the judiciary has been able to impose a separation of church and state that's nowhere in the Constitution is that Congress didn't stop them. The reason we had judicial review is because Congress didn't stop them. The reason we had a right to privacy is because Congress didn't stop them.


The only reason we have a right to privacy is because the Congress didn't 'stop them'? Are you kidding me?

So, in Mr. DeLay's world, there would be no right to privacy. The government would be able to control every aspect of your life.

In Mr. DeLay's world, there would be no ability for the Supreme Court to review the constitutionality of laws passed by congress. Protection of minority groups would be permanently gone.

And, in Mr. DeLay's world, Pat Robertson would be the Supreme Ruler of the United Theocracy of America.

Mr. DeLay claims that the Democrats have no agenda. You know what? I would prefer their 'no agenda' any day to DeLay's agenda. I personally like right to privacy and freedom of religion.

(Full Interview)

2 comments:

Boomr said...

The Constitution, which DeLay loves so much, was only written 14 years before the Supreme Court stated, "It is emphatically the province and duty of the courts to decide what the law is," in Marbury v. Madison. I would think 200 years of living under this rule would quash any Congressional opposition to it. Plus, the judiciary's ONLY Constitutional responsibility is to rule on what is constitutional.

"Congres shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion." That's in the First Amendment, other parts of which Republicans such as DeLay have ranted as being sacrosanct in terms of political donations, advertising, and yes, even gun ownership (although that's specifically dealt with in the Second Amendment, there's the argument that the NRA's lobbying arm is exercising 1st Amendment rights).

How does anyone support someone like DeLay, who clearly doesn't respect the American system of government?

Anonymous said...

I tried to write to DeLay about this, but he is only taking comments from people in his district (he's even gerrymandering e-mail!) Interestingly, this appears on his contact page:

Dear Constituents of the 22nd District,

As a service to my constituents, I am happy to make inquiries with federal agencies on your behalf. However, in accordance with the 1974 Privacy Act, you must complete the attached consent form. The consent form will allow the federal agency to release necessary information to my office.

If you have any questions, please don’t hesitate to contact my district office in Stafford.

Stafford District Office
10701 Corporate Drive, Suite 118
Stafford, TX 77477
Ph. (281) 240-3700
Fax (281) 240-2959

For a man who doesn't believe in the right to privacy, he thinks nothing of putting a link to the 1974 Privacy Act on his web page! What the hell are these people from Texas thinking? All I can think of is the Rich Texan on the Simpsons dancing in place and saying "Haw, Haw, Haw" everytime they "Ditto" people like DeLay.