Liberal Fact Lists usually aren't

I was browsing blogs today, and found someone who was celebrating the indictment of Tom DeLay and one of the comments on the post links to this page listing "facts" about DeLay's...shall we say less than stellar actions. Read it if you must, but the following is my direct response to it, or rather, to the commenter, Helen who is apparently incapable of distinguising between facts (ie. evidence, details, numbers, law citations) and editorial statements when trying to make a point.

#1-3 I'm not going to bother with because I don't have time to sort it all out. If we assume all three opinions so stated are true (which isn't likely to be a good assumption when the facts (notice, no quote marks) are investigated more completely)...the rest of the article is nothing but an editorial hack job...and here's why:

#4 The closest thing that might be considered "fact" is the bit about the travel expenses for the korean trip. While it's true that "everybody does it" is no justification for wrongdoing...everybody does it. I defy you to find one senator who's never taken a free trip or slipped money around from various organizations. In the whole boat of the Senate, this is a laughable, if not insignificant charge. Even at that, there's a difference between criminal law and senate rules. If you're going to go on a witch hunt, let's get that murder charge up there for Teddy Kennedy, eh?

#5. Okay, so he raised some money. Hillary raises money for Democratic action comittees every week...What's the point? The "evidence" provided doesn't contain any details about what happened to "disenfranchise" voters (undefined term in this case), what (if any) charges were made, whether or not DeLay was involved with decision making or ordering actions that were illegal.

Oh, and #6 is a good one, too...DEMOCRATS were getting in the way of Texas state senate proceedings and you're getting worked up over DeLay tracking a plane down. And you know what? If a bunch of Republicans were being whiney cry-babies and walking out on senate sessions just to get in the way, I'd want them slapped back into their jobs that I, a taxpayer have comissioned them to do. But not to get too far off topic here...What was probably a 5 minute phone call, while under a strict interpretation of "federal resources" it fits, but the political purposes needs further clarification, because as stated, from the site itself "Democratic members of the Texas State Legislature, who had taken a plane out of the capital city of Austin as a way to prevent a quorum in the House". It seems more like the Texas legislature was trying to get some work done, and the Dems walked out. Partisan? Maybe. But a drop in the ocean nonetheless.

#7 is a matter of pure political disagreement, nothing more.

#8. Who really cares? Small business owners have a right to say "no thanks" if they want to. That's why America's such a great place.

#9. Then that lobbiest should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. The fact that the lobbiest screwed people and probably broke the law does not mean that by giving DeLay money, it caused him to break the law (unless there's a law against accepting contributions from bad people). It's stupid, sure...but not illegal. Although I'm unfamiliar with the details...perhaps you could direct me to the text of the law that handles such things?

And #10. Smoking in a public place? well, sure that's illegal...punishable by a fine...And your point is...?
There's nothing illegal about having a bad attitude. You may not like it, but if attitude were a criminal offense, most of dailykos and democraticunderground readers would be writing their comments from prison.