Happy Hanukkah, Bill O'Reilly! (see article)

Happy Hanukkah, Bill O'Reilly! Barbara Ann Radnofsky, Texan for U.S. Senate 2006 No lyin' No cheatin' No stealin' Read More...   You may have noticed Barbara Radnofsky’s little dig to the ridiculous Bill O’Reily in her blog ads. If this is your first time to meet Barbara, she is running for U.S. Senate against Kay Bailey “perjury is just a technicality” Hutchison. Visit her website at www.radnofsky.com. Kay Bailey needs to be defeated. She is one of the lead characters in the corrupt republican regime. * Richard Morrison's diary :: :: * She is one of the republican senators that received money from the Coushatta Indians at the direction of Abramoff. Additionally, she received campaign dollars from ADCS, Inc., the PAC that was tied to Duke Cunningham. Finally, after a $5000 contribution from Alaska’s Ted Stevens, she switched her vote to support the “Bridge to Nowhere.” Kay Bailey needs to go. Behind her smiling face and “moderate” reputation is another corrupt republican that stands for nothing but power and money. I call on Kay Bailey to return those corrupt donations. And I call on each of you to support Barbara with donations from the grass roots, both volunteer time and money. Please support Barbara as you supported me. www.radnofsky.com Fight on! Richard Morrison Permalink

• O'Liely at it again - now that's - REAL journalism - sm - Starcat
  • Happy Hanukkah, Bill O'Reilly! (see article) - Democrat
  • I'd hardly call O'Reilly journalism, now would you? sm - Nah
    • I agree, but I'm not so sure he is convinced though. nm - Democrat
    • I was being sarcastic. - no message - Starcat
  • This probably all started with a 7-yo misunderstanding his teacher.nm - Democrat
  • I wonder how much Bush (i.e. you and - American Woman
    • Gotta laugh at the morons who think everything's Bush's fault too - hh
    • Yes, you'd think there would - actually be -- sm - Starcat
      • I agree he needs some - American Woman
        • ROTFLMBO! Good one. - no message - Starcat

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu

BILL O'REILLY, HOST: In the "Personal Story" segment tonight, political humorist Bill Maher (search), he has a new book out called "New Rules: Polite Musings from a Timid Observer." Of course, Mr. Maher is about as polite as I am and as timid as Dracula. He joins us now from Los Angeles.

You know, you've had some celebrities on your HBO show, "Real Time," which begins again on Friday, talking about policy and war on terror and stuff like that. I get the feeling they don't know very much, but you do. So I'd like to make Bill Maher, right now, the terror czar. Bill Maher, the terror czar. Could be a series.

How would you fight this War on Terror? How would you fight it?

BILL MAHER, HOST, HBO'S "REAL TIME": I think the first and most important thing is to get the politics out of the War on Terror. You know, maybe I'm a cockeyed optimist, Bill, maybe I'm naive, but I thought that 9/11 was such a jarring event that nobody would dare return to business as usual on that one subject after that.

But of course, we found out that nothing could be further from the truth. And your president, my president too, but the one you voted for...

O'REILLY: You don't know that. Were you looking over my shoulder there? I could have voted for Nader. I could have voted for Kerry, but Kerry wouldn't come on the program, so I wouldn't vote. But I could have gone for Ralph. Ralph's a friend of mine.

MAHER: Yes. Anyway, I said the guy you voted for, President Bush, you know, how come this guy, who was supposed to be such a kick-and-take- names kind of guy, how come he has not been able to get the politics out of this?

You know, as a guy who's been accused of treason, I'll tell you what real treason is: Treason is when legislators vote against homeland security measures because it goes against the wishes of their political or financial backers. Treason is the fact that, as a terrorist, you could still buy a gun in this country because the NRA (search) lobby is so strong.

O'REILLY: OK. But you're getting into the political, and I agree with you. I think that the country should be united in trying to seek out and kill terrorists, who would kill us.

But I'd like to have some concrete things that you, Bill Maher, the terror czar — and take this seriously, this could be a series — what would you do?

All right, so you've got bin Laden. You've got Al Qaeda (search). You've got a bunch of other lower-level terrorist groups. What do you do to neutralize them?

MAHER: OK. Well, first of all, you discounted my answer, which is get the politics out, but OK.

O'REILLY: Well, assume you can do that. They're gone.

MAHER: We'll let that go. Keep going. I wouldn't worry that much about bin Laden. I mean, capturing bin Laden at this point, it doesn't really matter whether he's dead or alive. He's already Tupac to the people who care about him and work for him. Capturing bin Laden, killing him would be like when Ray Kroc died, how much that affected McDonald's.

O'REILLY: It would be a morale booster. But I understand. You're not going to send...

MAHER: A morale booster, right. Well, we've had plenty of morale boosting. We've had plenty of window dressing. What we need is concrete action.

In the book I wrote before this one about terrorism, I suggested that we have a Secret Service for the people. I said whenever the president goes anywhere, he has very high-level, intelligent detectives who look around at a crowd. They know what they're looking for. They're highly paid. They're highly trained.

We don't have that in this country. We should have that. We should have a cadre of 10,000 highly trained people who would guard all public events, bus stations, train stations, airports — and stop with this nonsense that this robotic sort of window dressing...

O'REILLY: OK, so you would create a homeland security office that was basically a security firm for major targets and things like that. It's not a bad idea. Costs a lot of money. Costs a lot of money. It's not a bad idea.

MAHER: Costs a lot of money compared to what? If you paid 10,000 people a salary of $100,000 a year, that would, I think, cost $10 billion or something. That's nothing. There's that much pork in the transportation bill before you get...

O'REILLY: Yes, 10,000 wouldn't do it, but I get your drift.

MAHER: Whatever it costs.

O’REILLY: You would create a super-security apparatus. OK, that's not bad. That's not bad. How about overseas now?

MAHER: What we need to do is what I call get Israeli about this. Because the Israelis are not afraid of profiling. The Israelis are not afraid to bury politics in the greater cause of protecting their nation. We don't act that way. You know, I'm afraid 9/11 really changed nothing.

O'REILLY: Boy, your ACLU (search) pals aren't going to like that. You're going to lose your membership card there.

MAHER: I'm not a member of the ACLU.

O'REILLY: Oh, sure you are, just like I voted for Bush. You're a member of the ACLU. I can see the card right in your pocket there.

MAHER: Bill, I'm not a joiner. I'm not a joiner. I don't like organizations.

O'REILLY: They won't have you, Maher, let's be honest about that. All right, now, in your book, which is very amusing, by the way — if you want a few laughs buy Maher's book.

MAHER: Thank you.

O'REILLY: You take some shots at FOX News, which is your wont, and I just want to know why you think we're so fabulously successful here.

MAHER: Well, I think that question has been answered many times. It's because the conservative viewer in this country, or on radio the conservative listener, is very predictable. They like to hear what they like to hear. They like to hear it over and over again.

O'REILLY: All the surveys show that the viewers are all over the map. They're not conservative in a big bloc. Some of them are moderate. Some of them are Democrats. Some of them are Moroccans. I mean, they're everywhere. That's your analysis? That just the conservatives watch us?

MAHER: Well, I think mostly the conservatives do watch you. That's not to take anything away from what you guys have achieved over there. It's a very well-produced broadcast, and they have excellent personalities like yourself, Bill. Who could resist watching you when you get home from work at night?

O'REILLY: Whoopi Goldberg, maybe? I don't know.

MAHER: Yes.

O'REILLY: Anyone who doesn't watch here is misguided. We identify them as such.

But look, I think there's more to it than — you're in TV. You know the ratings game. I mean, if you don't provide a product that is satisfying people, no matter what your ideology, they tell you to take a hike.

There's a guy over at MSNBC. He's a very conservative guy. He was hired and nobody's watching him. They hire liberals. Nobody watches them. Air America (search). Nobody's listening to it.

I mean, there's got to be a reason why we're No. 1, a punch line for you, and No. 2, you know, becoming the most powerful news network in the world.

MAHER: Well, I think, as I say, it's a well-produced product. You know, your program moves along, always at a clip that never seems to bore. You know, you move along to the next topic, the next guest. It never sort of drags. I don't think a lot of people know how to produce that stuff that way.

O'REILLY: All right. It's bells and whistles and my charming personality. That's what I thought it was.

Last thing: You know, one thing I like about Maher is he's not a hypocrite. He drives a little hybrid vehicle. Right? You putter around there. Does it have training wheels? What's it like?

MAHER: Actually, I had the Prius hybrid for three years. I was one of the first ones to get it right after 9/11. And I traded it in a few months ago for the Lexus hybrid.

O'REILLY: I think we should all cut back on our energy consumption, and I think we should all get these hybrids as fast as we can.

Hey, Bill, always nice to see you. Thanks very much. Good luck with the season on the TV show.

MAHER: Continued success there, Mr. No. 1.

O'REILLY: All right. Thank you.

Watch "The O'Reilly Factor" weeknights at 8 p.m. and 11 p.m. ET and listen to the "Radio Factor!"

Content and Programming Copyright 2005 Fox News Network, L.L.C. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Transcription Copyright 2005 eMediaMillWorks, Inc. (f/k/a Federal Document Clearing House, Inc.), which takes sole responsibility for the accuracy of the transcription. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. No license is granted to the user of this material except for the user's personal or internal use and, in such case, only one copy may be printed, nor shall user use any material for commercial purposes or in any fashion that may infringe upon Fox News Network, L.L.C.'s and eMediaMillWorks, Inc.'s copyrights or other proprietary rights or interests in the material. This is not a legal transcript for purposes of litigation.

Humboldt is spoon feeding the FOLKS this federal reserve nonsense.  Sign. Blink. Startle. Jerk.

He first said this about the Spears situation:

"On the pinhead front, 16-year-old Jamie Lynn Spears is pregnant. The sister of Britney says she is shocked. I bet. Now most teens are pinheads in some ways. But here the blame falls primarily on the parents of the girl, who obviously have little control over her or even over Britney Spears. Look at the way she behaves. And by the way, the mother, Lynne Spears, has reportedly already sold pictures of the upcoming baby of her 16-year-old for a million bucks. Incredible pinhead."

And this is what he had to say about the Palin situation:

"Millions of families are dealing with teen pregnancy, and as long as society doesn't have to support the mother, father or baby, it is a personal matter. Some Americans will judge Governor Palin and her family, and she will have a hard time running for vice president if there is much more chaos. For the sake of her and her family, we hope things calm down. This country needs a vibrant policy debate, not a soap opera."

I am not defending Spears at all, but that is 1 example of a pinhead. 

last night.

What I believe is this is going to be one world government with the U.N. being the governing body.  Yet, the U.N. owes the U.S. millions of dollars for the building and land they meet in. They haven't paid in years (at least since some time in the 1990s).

Saw O getting off the plane and he didn't look very happy. First time I didn't see him with that big smile on his face. He looked a bit worried. Could it be that he now realizes being Prez is not so easy?  That not everyone in the world is wowed by his charm?

He is in independent and he does lean to the conservative side.  I basically state something that happens to be similar to what O'Reilly says and it instantly makes what I said stupid, huh?  Is that how it works? 

I couldn't care less how ACORN competes for grants, etc.  If they are dishing out money to the dems, you don't think the dems will push for them to get said tax money.  Just like the unions and the dems pushing for more union control.....why.....because unions pay big bucks to democrats and their campaigns....duh. 

As for ACORN...there are people within ACORN itself who don't like what is going on.  I truly feel that there is something seriously wrong going on with that organization.  What exactly it is....I don't know, but I sure has heck know the news media won't even try to uncover it.  They are too busy kissing Barry's mixed butt.

Hilariously shows how the hipocrasy knows no bounds: 

http://www.indecision2008.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=184086

This above is a link to the Daily Show with John Stewart.  I love his show, and Stephen Colbert's.  I'm not a political junkie (yet) so I need a *lot* of comic relief with my politics in order to stomach it. 

Both sides are hypocrites, it's true.  But I swear, the Republicans are so much funnier.  The mental gymnastics they're having to go through in order to claim SP has "experience" alone is a sight to see.  (Watch the clip above if you don't believe me.  Oh, and you can see S. Palin making a good point near the end of it for all of you who are fans of hers.)  In fact, Jon Stewart said he's putting "county first" in supporting Obama, because McCain being the pres. would make his job (as a comedian) so much easier...

Oh, and have no fear, anyone.  I balance out the political comedy with a healthy dose of serious political coverage too.  The most serious I can find lately is the stuff on PBS.  You know, the calm, old-style journalism type, free of the crawl at the bottom of the screen, free of all the hype and wild graphics at the bottom of the screen, free of people shouting because they actually take turns letting each other talk.  Anybody else miss that kind of reporting, where it's kinda boring to watch and you have to actually listen and pay attention to more than sound bites?  Ah, well.  I'm rambling...

Joy was hateful through the whole thing. I used to like her but not anymore.

She's always arguing with Liz and now she even told Bill that she doesn't hate him, she just dislikes him. You know why? He tells it like it is and she even seemed furious that he and Barney Fife got into it on his program. It makes her sound like she likes Barney and she definitely doesn't believe he had anything to do with the downfall of FM/FM.  Bill tried to explain it but you think she would listen? Heck no.  I just can't believe how hateful she can be!

Liberals don't promote violence, huh?  How about the gay rights protestors who physically knocked a cross out of an older woman's hands because how dare she oppose their opinion? 

8 October 2005, Seattle, WA:
Veteran's Home Vandalized
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/jamieson/243...html?source=rss

4 September 2005, Louisiana:
Democrat Senator Threatens Violence Against Bush
Mary Landrieu: I'll Punch Bush, 'Literally'

1 September 2005, National:
Leftist Radio Host Encourages Looting
Sean Hannity

25 April 2005, National:
Leftist Radio Threatens to Assassinate Bush
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadA...le.asp?ID=17878

17 February 2005, Portland, OR:
Former Pentagon Adviser Assaulted at University
Protester throws shoe at Richard Perle - Politics - MSNBC.com

24 January 2005, Milwaukee, WI:
Five Democrats Charged with Election-Day Tire Slashing
JS Online: 5 charged in GOP tire slashings

8 November 2004, San Francisco, CA:
Muslim/Democrat Mob Attacks College Republicans
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadA...le.asp?ID=15855

30 October 2004, Durango, CO:
Liberal Professor Assaults Conservative Student
http://www.durangoherald.com/asp-bin/artic...ews041030_1.htm

22 October 2004, Tuscon, AZ:
Conservative Commentator Assaulted at University
http://www.azcentral.com/12news/news/artic...ch22-ON-CP.html

5 October 2004, Orlando, FL:
Democrat Mob Storms GOP HQ, Injures Staffers
Protestors Ransack Bush/Cheney Headquarters In Orlando - Politics News Story - WKMG Orlando

October 2004, National:
A Pattern of Leftist Hatred
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article....RTICLE_ID=40898

17 September 2004, Huntington, WV:
3-Year-Old Girl Attacked by Democrat Thugs
Washington Times - Democrats accused of ripping Bush signs

20 March 2003, Madison, WI:
Republican Heaquarters Vandalized
JS Online: GOP headquarters in Madison hit with bricks, paint bombs


11 March 2003, Los Angeles, CA:
Peaceniks Destroy 9-11 Memorial
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article....RTICLE_ID=31473

1 April 2005
Violent leftist/Democrat physically assaults conservative Pat Buchanan at Western Michigan University
http://onegoodmove.org/1gm/1gmarchive/002026.html

13 February 1996
Liberals steal press run of conservative newspaper Carolina Review in an effort to preserve victory for their liberal candidate
http://www.townhall.com/opinion/colu.../16/12704.html

1 March 2002
Liberals steal entire press run of a monthly conservative publication at the University of California-Berkeley and harass and intimidate its staff
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/ar...TICLE_ID=26652

30 November 2004
Entire run of the November issue of the Yale Free Press, a conservative student publication, was stolen over the Thanksgiving break
Yale Daily News - Editors say Yale Free Press stolen

October 1999
Liberals at California State University at Sacramento stole 3,000 copies of the student newspaper. They were enraged because the paper, The State Hornet, had published the picture of a Hispanic man being arrested and charged with resisting arrest at a football game.
Nat Hentoff

1992
Liberals vandalize offices of The Collegian at the University of Massachusetts
http://collegefreedom.org/95press.htm

I cant stand to watch O'Reilly, he tries to portray that he knows everything and yet he is just a blow-hard..Someone who professes to know all but knows nothing..

I

O'Reilly quitting, Woo..Hoo..Watch Olbermann dance around his desk, LOL!

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/06/01.html#a8537

The right jumped all over Dan Rather when he made a mistake one time, yet they don't even whimper over something even more irresponsible and egregious happening twice with O'Reilly. 

BIll O'Reilly is a mysoginistic, race-baiting bigot who believes that everyone who is a guest on his show should kiss HIS butt.  IMO he gives real journalists a really bad image and should have been kicked off Fox eons ago

I don;t think he should have done that.  To pretend that Fox is actually a news outlet does the voters a disservice.  But hey, that;s the kind of guy he is.

I was cheering that Bill is BACK!  I've been fit to be tied over his lingering lethargy for the last period of months, and have written to complain, too. 

There's a lot more on the web about Barney Frank and how filthy he is (in more ways than 1) this whole thing.  He should've been put in jail along with Chris Dodd and Palsen, etc.  Barney Frank's former lover worked for this outfit before they split many years ago.  I've read so much on it that I don't recall which place I read it, but obviously you won't find any of this investigative stuff on the driveby channels.  Even FNC doesn't put some stuff out there, which ticks me off.  But I find it, anyway between the conservative blogs, sites, talk radio, etc.  And these sources can be easily checked, so the libs can throw all the hissy fits they want.  If they honestly think it's okay to give literally ANY party a free pass just b/c it has your letter or preference behind it, that's just nuts!  I'm dying to clean out the RINOs in "my" party.  They don't belong there.

Okay, I almost laughed myself to death watching these two morons go at it last night.  My favorite part of the interview would have to be:

COULTER: No. No. I said more books.

O'REILLY: I sell more books than you do.

COULTER: No, you don't.

O'REILLY: Yes, I do.

COULTER: No, you don't.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,478046,00.html

A quote:

O'REILLY: Massive neglect? Let's take a look at that bit of overstatement. Halfway through President Clinton's tenure in office, the poverty rate was 13.7%. Halfway through President Bush's tenure the rate is 12.7, a full point lower.

[COMMENT According to statistics obtained from the U. S. Census site, when Bill Clinton began his term as President in 1993, the poverty rate was 15.1%. By the time Clinton left office the poverty rate was 11.7%. By 2002, under George Bush the rate began to rise again to 12.1% in 2002, 12.5% in 2003 and 12.7% in 2004.

According to the Christian Science Monitor this most recent increase was unforeseen by analysts who expected the number to drop along with unemployment and may indicate a disturbing trend. While the poverty level for Asians declined and it remained stable for Hispanics and African-Americans, the only group that saw an increase was non-Hispanic white Americans living in the midwest. In other words there are 1.1 million poorer red state residents this year than there were last year.]

O'REILLY: In 1996 the Clinton budget allotted $191 billion for poverty entitlements. That was 12.2% of the budget. ... However, the Bush 2006 budget allots a record-shattering $368 billion for poverty entitlements - 14.6% of the entire budget - a huge increase over Clinton's spending. Did the elite media mention that? Jesse Jackson mention that? Of course they didn't. Because it's much more convenient for Evan Thomas and others to imply that America under President Bush has turned its back on the poor. But it's absolute nonsense. Even in the midst of the war on terror [Note: Did he mean the war of choice in Iraq?], this country is spending a massive amount of money tryin' to help the poor. So why the lie? Because political gain can be made off the suffering of others, that's why. Those who oppose the Bush administration don't care about the truth. They only want to advance their own agenda, so once again the No-Spin zone rides to the rescue.

Hard-working Americans are providing the poor with Medicaid, food stamps, supplemental security income - that's free money - child nutrition programs, welfare payments, child daycare payments, temporary assistance to needy families, foster care, adoption assistance and health insurance for children. But, it will never be enough for the Jesse Jacksons and Howard Deans of the world. Never! If they told you the truth, they'd go out of business.

Now, I fully expect to be attacked by the far-left media for tellin' you all this. I'm sure they'll label me a racist, a shill for Bush, stuff like that. But, I don't care. The dollars don't lie. We are a generous nation. And that is the truth.

COMMENT

Most of the poor in this country WORK, many of them hold down two and three jobs. If you want to read a damning book on this topic, I suggest you get Barbara Ehrenreich's Nickeled and Dimed: On (Not) Getting by in America. Ms. Ehrenreich went underground and worked at minimum wage jobs for a year. She discovered a few unpleasant facts about life on the lower rungs of the economic ladder. Self-satisfied, replete, rich men like Bill O'Reilly sit in their posh offices and scare hard-working Americans into believing that their taxes go to indigent scofflaws who sit at home guzzling beer, smoking pot, eating chips and watching TV. Those of us closer to homelessness know this is not the case.

When he mentioned that SSI (social security supplemental income) is free money, he neglected to say that it is money that goes to disabled Americans or that providing health coverage for children reduces trips to the emergency room!

Sometimes I wonder how many poor people Mr. O'Reilly actually knows or has associated with on a long-term basis? For the past 15 years I've been involved in a local program that offers music scholarship to needy families. In that time I've taught 7 different children from 7 different poverty situations and I came to know the families personally. Most of the adults in the family work really hard. Sometimes the kids worked, too, after school. Some had parents trying to break a drug habit (yes, they held down a job) or schizophrenic parents (who were incapable of working) or an abusive parent (who worked, then took it out on the family), but most were blessed with caring parents who were doing the best to provide for their children against almost impossible odds.

So when I hear guys like O'Reilly spout their simplistic tripe implying that the poor are sucking the lifeblood out of hard-working Americans, I see red.

Also, I don't trust O'Reilly's numbers on entitlement programs simply because he never once used the words inflation-adjusted dollars. If he was simply quoting raw numbers, I'd like to remind him that 15 years ago the dollar went farther. Additionally, he did not indicate through graphics or verbally whether or not there was parity between the two budgets, i.e., was he citing figures that included exactly the same programs in both figures?

Given O'Reilly's dubious track record, one cannot accept his statements without independent verification.

Try watching the morning news at 6 a.m. or during the day until 5-6 p.m. That's the news I'm talking about.

O'Reilly and the others are like Chris Matthews, Keith Oberman, and all those other fellas. They are more like a political talk shows. That's not news.

Sunday, Oct. 02, 2005 Power Outage House leader Tom DeLay's indictment upends the Republicans' to-do list and their outlook for next year's elections. Can they recover in time? By KAREN TUMULTY AND MIKE ALLEN The news that House Majority Leader Tom DeLay had been dreading for months was brought by an aide, who interrupted DeLay's weekly lunch with Dennis Hastert in the House Speaker's office. DeLay absorbed it, and then the man widely called the Hammer on Capitol Hill (though rarely to his face) did what he does best: he hit back. All right, DeLay replied. Let's go. Let's go fight. Less than three hours later, before a roomful of reporters, DeLay addressed a Texas grand jury's charge that he and two political associates conspired to funnel $155,000 in illegal corporate campaign contributions into Texas legislative races. He called it one of the weakest, most baseless indictments in American history and the prosecutor who brought the case a partisan fanatic. That night, anxious to show he's not a recluse, he introduced Rudy Giuliani at a Friends of Israel banquet. DeLay even made an uncharacteristic round of the cable shows, hinting darkly on cnn that he would soon produce very good evidence that his nemesis, Travis County district attorney Ronnie Earle, had engaged in a conspiracy of his own--with the Democratic leadership here in Washington. Combativeness has seen Tom DeLay through near-death experiences before, but on the Hill late last week, it was hard to miss the signs that his foot soldiers and allies had begun positioning themselves in anticipation of his demise. G.O.P. rules require that DeLay, 58, majority leader since 2003, relinquish his post while he fights the conspiracy charge, and speculation is rife that even if he is acquitted his days as one of the most powerful men in the House could be over. You leave a job like this, there is no coming back, says a top Republican official who likes DeLay and thinks he will be cleared. Politics abhors a vacuum more than anything else, and it's going to move past him too quickly. Almost immediately, it did. A plan engineered by DeLay and Hastert to install complaisant Rules Committee chairman David Dreier as temporary majority leader was nixed by conservatives who dislike Dreier's moderate positions on stem-cell research and gay marriage. Instead the brain trust installed ambitious whip Roy Blunt, who will share some of the majority leader's duties with Dreier. The setup is so shaky that some House Republicans are pressing for the election of a new leadership team as early as January. Meanwhile, lobbying shops that had traded on the access to DeLay were desperately dialing House aides to forge new relationships. Those not tied to DeLay were calling the same staff members to gloat. There's millions of dollars on the table, said an aide who had heard from both camps. These guys are going to slaughter each other. What's left of the G.O.P. leadership, already beset by a raft of other political problems, was trying to figure out how to salvage the ambitious legislative agenda of more tax cuts, hurricane help and gas-price relief that they want to carry them to next year's midterm elections--a more difficult challenge with the sidelining of the man who had so determinedly pulled off many of their close victories. DeLay may not have seen the worst of it yet. Sources tell TIME that while Earle was closing in on DeLay from Austin, Texas, a federal investigation into the spreading scandal around disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff, accused with Michael Scanlon (a former press secretary of DeLay's) of bilking their Indian-tribe clients out of $66 million, has begun lapping at the edges of the former majority leader's operation. A former Abramoff associate who was questioned by the FBI in August says, They had a lot of e-mails, a lot of traffic between our office and DeLay's office. Many of those exchanges involved lavish travel by DeLay arranged by the lobbyist but requested, the e-mails suggest, by aides in DeLay's office. (House members are allowed to accept gifts under limited circumstances but not to solicit them.) Says the source: There was nothing I saw that hit DeLay personally, but there was a lot of questionable stuff that was going on with his staff. 'Tom wants this. Tom wants that.' Was it really him or just the staff that was being aggressive? DeLay's office wouldn't comment on the Justice Department investigation, and neither would the FBI. Republicans had plenty of problems even before the latest blow to DeLay. Voters are angry about gas prices, the war in Iraq and the botched response to Hurricane Katrina. Polls show President George W. Bush at or near the lowest public-approval ratings of his presidency. On the other side of the Capitol, Senate majority leader Bill Frist faces an investigation by the Securities and Exchange Commission into the circumstances surrounding his decision to sell all of his stock in the hospital chain founded by his family, Hospital Corporation of America, in June, just before the share price dropped following a bad earnings report. So dispirited are Republicans that some worry about losing control of the House--a danger that once seemed remote. We're looking in the crystal ball. We're moving into an area where we don't know what will happen, says deputy whip Tom Cole, a conservative from Oklahoma. With a switch of only 15 seats required to end their majority, Cole is anxious that the party may have to contest as many as 100 tight races if the winds arraying against it turn into a national backlash like the one that ended the Democrats' 40-year reign in 1994. Having seen how the Democrats failed to galvanize their voters in that campaign, Republicans say the chief goal in rewriting their strategy for the fall will be to re-energize their base. The plan taking shape calls for a robust conservative agenda through next spring, including a tax-reform package. That move would allow Republicans to pivot back to issues like education tax credits that would appeal more to moderates as the elections approach. As for DeLay, his struggles appear likely to consume him for many months. He has launched what amounts to a major political campaign to convince supporters that the indictment is flimsy and he is a victim of a political smear. DeLay pointed to Democrats' vow to use G.O.P. ethics as a campaign issue, and supporters noted criticism of Earle in Texas for speaking in May to a $100,000 fund raiser for a Democratic political action committee (PAC). But DeLay has produced no evidence Earle conspired with Democrats in Washington. While it's true that Earle and DeLay have been locked in a complicated war of Texas-size egos for years, the charges against DeLay are fairly simple. During the 2002 elections, a committee DeLay founded to support conservative politicians--Texans for a Republican Majority, or TRMPAC--allegedly accepted $155,000 in corporate donations and then included that in a check for $190,000 to the Republican National Committee, which then routed a similar amount to seven Texas legislative candidates. DeLay's lawyers say the transactions were separate and that the PAC accepted money from both individuals and corporations. The contribution helped produce six wins that were crucial to DeLay's political ambitions in Washington because they resulted in a Republican majority in the state legislature, which redrew congressional district lines and helped add five more Republicans to the state's congressional delegation. If convicted, DeLay faces up to two years in prison and a maximum fine of $100,000. DeLay has done his best to paint the D.A. as a Democratic loose cannon. But Earle, 63, points out that of the 15 public officials he has prosecuted, 12 have been fellow Democrats. Texas law makes it a felony for corporations and labor unions to contribute money to political campaigns, Earle tells TIME. My job is to prosecute felonies. I'm doing my job. The grand jury foreman, William Gibson, 76, insists that this was not one of those rubber-stamp deals. Ronnie Earle did not indict Mr. DeLay. Twelve people on that grand jury voted to indict. If DeLay has cause for hope, it may be that Earle has been more successful convicting minor figures than major ones. The majority leader has put together a legal team headed by Dick DeGuerin, who handed Earle the most spectacular failure of his career: a 1994 misconduct case against former state treasurer Kay Bailey Hutchison that Earle was forced to drop on the first day of trial. Hutchison is now the state's senior Senator. There are those who predict that DeLay will be able to balance mounting a defense with pulling strings behind the scenes in the House. But whereas he had been accustomed to just stepping downstairs to the majority leader's spacious suite of Capitol offices after a House vote, dusk last Thursday afternoon found DeLay outside on the Capitol Plaza, waiting at a traffic light to return to his office in the Cannon House Office Building across the street. Just like any other Congressman.