You wrote:
"The indictment alleges that DeLay conspired with two of the PAC's directors to knowingly violate the campaign finance laws.

Partisanship aside, is this a really a huge big deal?"

Yes... I would hope that most people would think an elected official knowingly violating the law is a big deal, and your opinions on this matter are clearly partisan.

You also write:
"With most of America now believing these charges to be politically based, the effect on the overall scheme of things in Washington will be negligible."

Yet the website that you link to states:
" On Wednesday night, 43% said the charges were based upon the facts involved while 31% said they were politically motivated.

On Thursday, following a full day of news coverage, 37% said the charges were based upon the facts while 39% said they were politically motivated."

Sorry to break the news to you but... 39% IS NOT MOST. But don't let the facts get in the way of your opinions.

Steve, you misunderstood what I meant by "is this a big deal" - clearly, any kinds of violations of the law by an elected official are a big deal and should Delay be found guilty, he should serve whatever sentence the courts hand down to him. What I meant by "is this a big deal" was "is this the scandal that takes down the Republican party? Is this scandal enough to end DeLay's political career"? In that way, it isn't. DeLay's career will not end, and this will not result in the Republicans losing the House next November.

And yes, perhaps saying "most" was a bit premature. However, an 8% jump in public opinion following a day's worth of press coverage is pretty significant. It will be interesting to see if Rasmussen does another poll over the weekend to see if this trend continues.

Keep in mind, this column is about giving readers a glimpse as to how things really work in Washington - I don't intend to use it as a platform to bash one political party or another. If you think that I am in anyway defending DeLay, you're reading too much into what I'm writing. This is meant to be objective - and objectively, I don't believe this will be a major blow to the party. Only time will tell if my analysis is correct.

I think it's crap that you want to let campaing finance abuses slide. Just because it's not a surprise doesn't mean that it's still not reprehensible.

People vote Senators and Representatives into positions of power and give them the ability to craft law. The least they should be doing is following the very laws they institute.

Perhaps it's not a big deal that the Clinton's conspired with Vincent Foster to cover up details of the Whitewater scandal...what's a little conspiracy amongst friends? Right?

Maybe next you'll say "It's not a big deal that Nixon broke into the DNC office. And it's not a big deal that Karl Rove leaked a CIA agent's name."

Perhaps you would like to give carte blanche to our lawmakers to ignore rules willy-nilly. What a disaster that would be.

Maurice, you're missing the point of my column. I'm not judging whether or not DeLay is guilty of the crime - that's not my place, a jury will do that. What I am saying is that this indictment will not have a major effect on events in DC, because it was not a surprise. Everyone who has been following DeLay's trials and tribulations have been expecting this indictment for quite a while. It isn't like some of the other political scandals that hit with no warning and caused major repercussions for the individual or their party.

Despite what my opinion may be on the current campaign finance laws (perhaps I'll write a column explaining why they don't work some time), if DeLay committed a crime, he should be held accountable for it. The law is the law, and no one is above it.

Again, my concern here has nothing to do with defend DeLay - he doesn't need me to do that, nor do I desire to - but to explain that this indictment is not going to result in any kind of major upheaval.

How come we get to hear all about Tom Delay and his 1 count indictment by a partisan who knows no bounds let alone the definition of prosecutorial discretion, but not a damn thing about the IDENTITY THEFT committed by Chuck Schumer's crew?

http://www.nynewsday.com/news/nationworld/nation/ny-usschu224436974sep22,0,1690297.story?coll=ny-nationalnews-headlines.

That story was completely covered over by Hurricane Rita coverage, Furius. I was paying attention to it mainly because I'm tracking the Maryland Governor's race.

There will probably be more on it, if charges are filed against the staffers. Schumer is the head of the DSCC, but its really only a figurehead position. He's the champion fundraiser of the Democratic Party, so he's got the job since that's primarily what the DSCC is all about. These staffers were probably out on their own, trying to dig up as much dirt as they could. I don't know why they'd be going after Steele, since he's not running for Senate, but maybe it was preemptive. In any case, we'll hear more about this soon, I'm sure.

I am still bothered that Sandy Berger's story didn't get more attention. What he and Kerry did was far worse than DeLay's antics, yet last I heard Berger was getting jack squat for coverage. It's pathetic.

The latest news is the conspiracy charages have been dropped and new charges of money laundering were made.