Jeff, I just called Walden's offices... The local office in Medford had "no idea how he voted." The D.C. office front desk person also had "no idea" either. They're going to get back to me... or maybe post it right here on BlueOregon.

If it isn't in Roll Call, it might take a FOIA.

Well, to be fair, it's not exactly a vote for corruption.

Although it really pains me to agree, you're right--we should be fair. I think it's possible to remain fair but still pose a vigorous opposition. Saying that it was a vote for corruption was polishing the apple--it is possible to imagine that someone voted for this for a reason other than empowering a bad guy. But then, there's really no way to remove the context from the vote, either. That the effect is corruption is part of the truth, too.

(Also, it was the GOP's first move. Hard to imagine why an interest in due process would arise so suddenly and urgently.)

So we might never truly know who spoke out on this!

As you can see if you take a stroll through Talking Points Memo over the past day or so, this is not necessarily the case. It's just that it took certain key bloggers urging various congressional constituents to call their representatives t begin piecing it together.

(not you, Becky, but) What?

The reason this even IS news is back when Rostenkowski got his thing in a blender over some indictable scandal, the Republicans in Congress passed this very rule they're now repealing to remove Rosty from the Leadership slot.

It's an Administrative Rule, no? I don't care if they voted over it by whack-a-mole at the uber-secret Chuck-E-Cheese in the basement at Rayburn, WE'RE GONNA FIND OUT. East AND West Blogyzistan are on it.

Kagro X over at Daily Kos just got his diary promoted to the front page for his excellent list of six things the Democrats should be doing to make this see the light of day. Congresswoman Hooley oughta love this - she's a tough woman.

You might need popcorn and a supply of beer now, just to get the full entertainment value from C-SPAN if this happens.

Although that's a sobering, salient point, Randy, I don't think we do, even if the Democrats implement Kagro X's excellent plan in Congress, or any other well-considered tactic to bring Delay's true character to the front page of the American consciousness.

For one thing, it's not like they otherwise disappear from the floor; it's not like they can't offer a reasonable alternative every time these issues come up in the hopes that moderate Republicans in Congress will give some thoughtful consideration, for example, to not purging CIA of good people.

For another, this IS important. For all the cringeworthy parliamentary conduct in Congress under Hastert and his surrogates as Speaker, a majority under Delay virtually ensures that Congresspeople with a conscience will be heard even less during session, that any reasonable debate will be mischaracterized as 'just partisan obstruction' for its own sake, etc.

Finally, DeLay believes himself to be above the law, and if we as Democrats do not stand for equality and justice for all, here and now, not only will he be correct about himself, but the law will mean less to America as a result. It has looked throughout the redistricting effort in Texas, which cost three Texas Democrats their seats in Congress, like DeLay broke the law.

If Barack Obama did what he did, it would still be breaking the law, and the Republicans would do what they did in 1990 with Gingrich. Only this time, they'd have the majority. That's Two Americas, and that's wrong, to paraphrase JE.

To me, that's worth focusing our representatives on every bit as persuasively as any of the other issues that may come up.

No one is above the law. We as Democrats have had to suck down enough scandal to know that intimately.

Oh, we're not just picking on Walden, although he is the guy here. This is a national effort, as follows from Daily Kos, a national blog.

And sure, let's pass a rule for the D caucus: even if it doesn't shame the Republicans - and I doubt it will, as most Republicans in Congress have no shame - I'm perfectly happy to wait until Ronnie Earle takes this case to trial in front of a friendly Travis County Judge and jury in Austin. Meanwhile, it'll teach D Congressmen to put their own houses in order, justice-wise.

Moral of the story: injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere, and if you want to lead, you'll have to first crush the natural injustice that comes with Republican state governments. They'll happily execute the retarded, and they'll trump up whatever dirt they can find to sink you. See Bill Clinton for examples - that whole roo-fest started in Arkansas.

Earle will get the conviction, and then DeLay can lead the majority for as long as he wants from his jail cell; I'd happily volunteer to cut the rope on that son of a bitch's soap, too.

Earle's going after Governor Goodhair first, anyway. All I need to see for the forces of good is for the light to shine on this man's blatant and illegal power-grab.

I've been calling Walden's office since Wednesday. They keep saying the person who knows the info (and apparently is keeping it secret from everyone else) is Brian Hard. He hasn't returned my calls, and is in meetings or away from his desk when I call.

I'm going to keep calling every day until he finds time to talk. :)

Indeed.

FINALLY! Just spoke to "Valerie Henry." She claims Walden was not in the room at the time, having stepped out to "speak to some Oregonians." However, she did finally commit to saying that Walden would have voted "yea," after saying that he felt "innocent until guilty" should apply in this case.

So now we at least can work from that perspective--that Walden approved changing the rule.