Perhaps after he is sent to prison, he can retitle his memoirs "My Struggle". Looking at the neo-conservative agenda as it has played out, he won't even have to change a lot of the words from the original German.

Some one care to explain this math?

I misread teh article. Sorry.

I would love to know what it's like to work in the US Dept. of Justice right now. Apparently, some of the prosecutors are professionals who care about justice, and do things such as investigating Tom DeLay... But their bosses are right wing kooks who justify torture, and seek to protect the Delays, and to delay, delay, delay the day of reckoning.

To do list for Delay associates:

1. Retain crimminal trial lawyer.

2. Pray.

That phrase made me vomit in my own mouth.

Disgusting. I need to scrub myself with a brillo pad now.

Maybe the cover art can show the saintly Tom Delay being crucified by those nasty Liberals.

Juanita at brazosriver.com (Fort Bend County, the only Congressional District in the county that has no representation) has been meticulously covering what she calls The Passtion of the Tom for years. She notes that "no surrender, no defeat" is a sublimely ironic title for the autobiography of a man who ran in a primary for the sole purpose of collecting campaign cash to use in his defense fund, who then dropped out because he was afraid of getting beaten by a Democrat in November, and has for the past six months been trying to manipulate the courts to avoid being labeled as the deserter, cut-n-run-er, traitor to the GOP, coward and surrender monkey he really is.

is it just me or is $3,200 x 12 = $38400 not $115,000

multiply the 38000 or so by 3 for three years of not doing it, and voila 115 000. Its math! But on the main subject, what is the reason for THE delay?

$115,000 was over 3 years. That's not nearly as bad as it sounded for doing nothing.

$3,200 a month -- that's about $115,000?

In this day and age of tele-commuting and consulting, I wonder how many people in the country do legitimate work for a company, but have never set foot inside the building? That certainly may not be the case with Mrs. DeLay, but it strikes me that an argument could easily be made that certain consulting functions would never require a trip to the physical office.

I understand the intent, but it saddens me to see the phrase "you know" added to your lede paragraph of this item ("... to see if she, you know, actually worked there.")

For too long this kind of activity has been seen as some sort of game by people in Washington from both parties. And this has further alienated everyday voters from what goes on in the Capitol.

I'm of the opinion that you take away from the seriousness of your article -- and the potential seriousness of the charge -- when you toss in terms like "you know."

OK -- but how does "$3200 a month" work out to $115,000 a year?

I don't mind dumping on Delay's wife , but please get the math right. Was that dollar amount per month or per week??

for the people who don't seem to get it.

The quote from the blog item is "For three years, Christine DeLay received $3,200 a month -- that's about $115,000 to you and me ..."

And here's how the math is done:

3200 x 12 x 3 = 115000 (12 months, 3 years)

0r

32000 x 36 = 115000 (36 months in 3 years)

To recap: that's $3200 per month for 3 years totaling $115000.

...how arithmetically icompetent so many of the posters are! Or maybe their problem is that they cannot read!

In either case, it does not reflect well on the performance of our education system.

Sounds more like 38,400 than 115,000. Like the salary of an administrative assistant or something.

Helpful hint for confused posters: reading the comments that have already been made can save you from looking like an idiot.

...how arithmetically icompetent so many of the posters are! Or maybe their problem is that they cannot read!

In either case, it does not reflect well on the performance of our education system.

---------------------------------------------

The confusion had little to do with math skills or reading comprehension, the sentence in question was poorly written, and that's the source of the confusion.

It's even more confusing because the didn't work for exactly 36 months, so the totals are off.

The writer simply took the rounded three years and used 36 months to calculate the final amount.

Do all the Repub wives and their children feed at the trough of we the taxpayers.

Seems that way---