Travis County DA Ronnie Earle isn’t partisan, as he continues to make clear to anyone who will listen.
Including the readership of the New York Times.
And since he’s not partisan, it must just be an oversight that for so many years, I missed the fact that one of the duties of the Travis County DA is to criticize the entire House Republican membership in the New York Times.
Here some of us silly simpletons thought the duties were probably more along the lines of prosecuting bad guys. But they are kind of wacky in Travis County, so who knows.
5 comments On New DA Duty: (Non)Partisan Editorializing For The NY Times!
You might be a hypocrite…
if you think it is unacceptable for Earle to defend himself while it is acceptable for House Republicans to use the same venue (NYT) to attack him personally.
A few examples of Republicans granted op-ed page space in the NYT during 2003-04 to defend themselves against charges from others: Gen. Franks (retired), Douglas Feith, Richard Perle, Condoleeza Rice, Colin Powell.
For the record, the vats majority of legislators he’s procured indictments against or investigated were Democrats. Not that he isn’t partisan, b/c of course he is, but that has little to do with whether DeLay is engaged in shady activities (to which the answer is entirely obvious).
TP: I think the defense that Earle is balanced because he’s procured more indictments against Democrats is inadequate.
To settle the question of whether he’s balanced and does a good job as DA, I think one would have to do a much closer analysis of the sorts of indictments he has pursued and against whom, some of the spectacular failures (we’ve all heard of his flimsy case against Kay Bailey Hutchison), and some of the successes.
Since it has only recently become a GOP state at the state level, for example, it’s entirely possible that many of Earle’s indictments are simply a result of his being forced to act on complaints bickering Dem candidates had AGAINST EACH OTHER. I don’t know if that’s the case, but if it were, he could well be cast as a partisan who helped his party settle internal debates. As I said, I don’t know this to be the case, but I think before any of us can make a judgment about Earle and his professionalism as DA, we would have to have done more of that sort of analysis of his cases.
I haven’t done that, so I refuse to proclaim that he’s done a "good job" or a "bad job" as DA.
But I do think it’s fair to question his claiming the nonpartisan high road when he pens an editorial for a liberal newspaper criticizing House Republicans in their entirety.
It’s kind of strange — I thought his PR people were doing a good job of spreading the "he’s indicted more Dems than Republicans" meme (which I have some problems with — but it’s an effective message). Why did he go way off that message by attacking House Republicans (as a partisan might)? It seems like a blunder to me.
Well, I think it’s plain that he is a partisan official, just as it is plain that Chuck Rosenthal is a partisan official. His claiming otherwise is just political bluster, barely worthy of comment (yet I find myself commenting nevertheless!). I don’t know whether he is a "good" DA or "bad" DA either, but to me, the focus on whether his attack on DeLay is politically motivated (duh) has absolutely nothing to do with whether DeLay has engaged in shady activities (double duh).
TP: I got no problems with anything you say. 🙂 And I’m actually glad you said it, because I agree with you on everything you’ve attached (duh) to (more on the last duh momentarily). But, not all of our friends do agree, which brings me to….
Nash: I didn’t say it was unacceptable. Please try reading before you type. Most of the commenters here do that, and we find that the conversation that takes place as a result is of a quality I encourage (see TP above).
The point I did make is that Ronnie Earle can’t expect to hide behind some notion that he’s a nonpartisan DA pursuing justice when he’s engaged in partisan editorial warfare blasting all House Republicans on the pages of the NY Times. The NY Times may want Ronnie Earle to be a national issue, but honestly, he’s really not a national issue. If he were so hellbent on being a good DA in pursuit of justice, he might just let his actions — or surrogates at the least — blast the other political party, and stick to doing his job. Surrogates who have been pointing out his Dem/GOP indictment numbers, for example, were doing a pretty good job in the PR war. As an analyst, I think he hurt his PR efforts with the NY Times op ed.
Back to TP and the shady activities…. I don’t think anyone would disagree that Tom DeLay has pushed the limits of existing campaign finance law, and pushed ’em hard. I’ve said all along, though, that I’ll be surprised if anything tangible can be made to stick so that convictions can be obtained, and I’m sticking to that. I’m not offering it as an apology or defense — he’s a hard partisan who plays extreme political hardball, and those sorts of politicians aren’t always beloved by the masses even in their own party. 🙂 DeLay’s methods may not be mine, but he’s certainly been effective. And he’s certainly an effective house leader. When I think of his abilities to count votes and build winning coalitions with thin majorities, I just marvel, because the GOP isn’t very good at such things (see Trent Lott’s tenure as Senate leader for the usual GOP incompetence — that guy couldn’t win a vote if his life literally depended on it; for the converse, see Tom Daschle, who was a frustratingly good floor tactician, although it ultimately cost him his seat, which could, one day, be Tom DeLay’s fate).
Comments are closed.