![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
News Round Up
Apr. 5th, 2006 03:19 pmAfter watching Good Night, and Good Luck, I am finding interesting parallels between Sen. McCarthy and Rep. Tom DeLay. DeLay has made the same sort of noise about the people who take issue with his methods as McCarthy did--attacking them personally instead of answering to charges or clarifying his actions. McCarthy accused others of communism; DeLay cries vendetta. Throughout, I have heard the answering charge of the prosecutor (Ronnie Earle) in DeLay's case, and I'm proud to say not once has he responded with a personal attack at all.
"Tom DeLay's political status has nothing to do with the criminal charges against him. This changes nothing. His criminal cases will proceed just as they would for any other defendant. DeLay's ultimate fate will be decided by the public acting through a jury."
Masterful phrasing, you ask me. Were life Law and Order, Earle might have said "His fate will be decided by the public acting through a jury, which clearly terrifies him." But good restraint on his part.
*
Score one more for future NY Governor, Eliot Spitzer. This time, he's tackling a company that embedded spyware in their programs, and good for him. A lot of Spitzer's campaigns attack relatively new targets--the payola scheme, for example--that are either unchecked because they are so new to the marketplace or else are "established" unwritten rule in an industry.
The company he is going after, Direct Revenue, is already seeming like a whiny bitch. They protest not that they weren't embedding spyware with their shareware, but that the lawsuit draws attention only to what they'd done rather that what they are doing.
Look, I won't make the case that our government doesn't sometimes offer leniency to criminals who show a concerned effort to improve themselves, but nowhere is it written or even practiced that we have to sit around and go "Oh, how wonderful this defendent is now" when the indictment goes out. Fact is fact, dudes--you send out spyware back then, and that's what Spitzer's taking you to task for. God, you'd think that with a shark like Spitzer on your case, you'd try to avoid encouraging him to look at your current stuff, too. Guess not.
*
This man is part of our Homeland Security Team. Granted, he's not exactly James Bond--he's more of a Money Penny (sp?)--but still. There's that kid who lied about attending Texas A&M and ended up editing NASA's statements, and now this jerk.
Seriously, beyond being a pedophile, this guy is disgusting. He sent pictures of himself posing in front of his place of work, flaunting his position and title to the undercover policemen. He should be shot (preferably out of a canon into the sun--who's with me?).
"Tom DeLay's political status has nothing to do with the criminal charges against him. This changes nothing. His criminal cases will proceed just as they would for any other defendant. DeLay's ultimate fate will be decided by the public acting through a jury."
Masterful phrasing, you ask me. Were life Law and Order, Earle might have said "His fate will be decided by the public acting through a jury, which clearly terrifies him." But good restraint on his part.
*
Score one more for future NY Governor, Eliot Spitzer. This time, he's tackling a company that embedded spyware in their programs, and good for him. A lot of Spitzer's campaigns attack relatively new targets--the payola scheme, for example--that are either unchecked because they are so new to the marketplace or else are "established" unwritten rule in an industry.
The company he is going after, Direct Revenue, is already seeming like a whiny bitch. They protest not that they weren't embedding spyware with their shareware, but that the lawsuit draws attention only to what they'd done rather that what they are doing.
Look, I won't make the case that our government doesn't sometimes offer leniency to criminals who show a concerned effort to improve themselves, but nowhere is it written or even practiced that we have to sit around and go "Oh, how wonderful this defendent is now" when the indictment goes out. Fact is fact, dudes--you send out spyware back then, and that's what Spitzer's taking you to task for. God, you'd think that with a shark like Spitzer on your case, you'd try to avoid encouraging him to look at your current stuff, too. Guess not.
*
This man is part of our Homeland Security Team. Granted, he's not exactly James Bond--he's more of a Money Penny (sp?)--but still. There's that kid who lied about attending Texas A&M and ended up editing NASA's statements, and now this jerk.
Seriously, beyond being a pedophile, this guy is disgusting. He sent pictures of himself posing in front of his place of work, flaunting his position and title to the undercover policemen. He should be shot (preferably out of a canon into the sun--who's with me?).
