Republicans - Republicrats, Jack Abramoff and Sleeze

Reader Josh Legere takes me to task in the previous entry for a variety of issues. I'm glad Josh dropped by. He is a very bright, intelligent commenter, usually found in the comment section of Marc Cooper's blog First Josh, you need to know that I'm not the author of End-Time Panic and The Liberal Ghost Dance, Gaghdad Bob from One Cosmos is. I merely reported it, and no, it is not a violation of APA rules to make political statements which is what Gaghdad Bob has done. The fact that he is a practicing psychologist doesn't take away from him the freedom to use his training and expertise to decry the silliness of the left in their caterwauling. I support his position. Too, I'm in the corporate marketplace and have been for the last 18 years (the mental health side of course) though I also teach at the university.

Josh asks, justifiably, why I'm not reporting on the "Jack Abramoff Scandal" and asks if I'm not repressing. So, I think Josh, as an intelligent commenter, deserves an answer. Lets get the psychological terminology out of the way however. The Freudian term "repression" usually is taken to mean an unconscious drive to remove from active memory a traumatic event. Thus, if the Abramoff issue were truly repressed, I would say to you "What Abramoff issue?" Perhaps I would just look at you with curiosity on my countanence as if I didn't understand.

This is not the case however. I haven't reported on Abramoff because it really doesn't interest me that much. However, now that you bring it up, I'd be more than happy to tell you what I think. I can sum it up in a very few words: "Put his butt in jail where he belongs." But, Josh, if you know me at all, you know then that a few words won't do if I can opine at length.

Abramoff has been the absolute delight of the Democratic Party. "Gotcha Politics" in action, in headlines, in everything but reality. And, no, I'm not going to defend any Republican that took bribes for votes or influence in a "quid pro quo" trade. Anyone in congress who actively took bribes from someone and changed their vote, or even insured their vote, or anyone in government who took bribes to perform an action or to not perform an action also belongs in jail. I don't care what their party is. But, obviously, the Democrats do care and they are milking this for all they are worth. OK, that is the nature of political battles, but don't expect anyone/everyone to stand by while they do it.

The real issue underlying the Abramoff scandal is money. Access to it and the desire for it. What Abramoff has done and primarily what brought him to the attention of the BUSH JUSTICE DEPARTMENT, is essentially rob a number of tribes by various means, but ultimately by taking their money and not doing their work, but forging documents to indicate that he had done the work. There are of course other issues, but to think that this is a "republican scandal" is to be wrong.

True, Abramoff is nominally a Republican but he made his mark as a lobbyist and that is a protected class of citizens, protected by the constitution that guarantees the right of the people to petition the government for a redress of grievances. Michael Barone has an excellent article in the Wall Street Journal and their online OpinionJournal (subscription required) outlining the so called depredations of the residents of "K" Street. Barone notes that the history of "K" Street goes back to the 1940s when a number of Roosevelts brighter aides left the government employ and "set up their own law firms and lobbying shops."

The WSJ goes on to note that Ohio's Bob Ney (R) took money to enter specific wordage into the Congressional Record:

It's also notable how few Members of Congress so far have truly been implicated, beyond accepting entirely legal campaign contributions. The most culpable is Ohio's Bob Ney, who has been cited in a "criminal information" for receiving trips and other favors in return for statements entered into the Congressional Record. Mr. Ney says that he too was duped, but there's no question he was willing to tap dance on cue for Mr. Scanlon, and that alone is sleaze-by-willing-association. If the House Ethics Committee serves any useful purpose, sanctioning Mr. Ney ought to be it."

I can't disagree with that. Better yet, toss his fanny out of Congress by refusing to seat him when the next congress begins. But, again, as the WSJ notes, the vast majority of Abramoff's crimes have to do nothing with bribery of members of congress, if making "campaign donations" to congress critters is evidence of tainted money, lets also decry each and every Republican who accepts campaign donations and each and every Democrat who does the same. Look, sleeze is sleeze, but this is no more Republican sleeze than it is Democrat sleeze. The Democrats are jumping for joy, the MSM is supporting them precisely because it has occurred on Bush's watch. But please note: The Justice Department that indicted and brought about a confession/plea bargan is the BUSH Justice Department. Contrast that, as did X Fixer with the lackadaisical efforts of the Clinton Justice Department under one Ms. Janet Reno to investigate and push for convictions of "Johnny Chung, Yogesh Gandhi, Ted Sioeng, John Huang, The Hsi Lai Temple Fundraiser, Charlie Trie, Ng Lap Seng, Warren Meddoff? And who can forget the Cheyenne and Arapaho Tribes." (H/T X Fixer) Oh, wait, that didn't happen did it. Well, score Bush 1, Clinton 0.

X Fixer also notes a 1996 Senate report: From the Senate Report:

The key to understanding why these officials found the idea of endorsing Tamraz’s pipeline to be so attractive five months before the presidential election may lie in Simpson’s communications to Carter and in Carter’s own subsequent communication with Heslin. By this point, after all, Heslin was the principal obstacle that remained for Tamraz. Buying access to U.S. Government officials had been comparatively easy, but the interagency working group headed by Heslin remained opposed to offering the official support Tamraz “desperately need[ed].'’ 140 After receiving his instructions from Simpson, therefore, it was not surprising that Carter should continue to “follow-up'’ on the Tamraz issue by contacting her at the NSC. What is particularly significant about this contact, however, is the degree to which the two Energy officials apparently understood this “follow-up'’ to revolve around Tamraz’s campaign contributions.�

Lastly, there is this from the Washington Post:

By early 1995, the U.S. oil companies operating in Azerbaijan had set up a Foreign Oil Companies group in Washington. It met with National Security Council energy expert Sheila Heslin and later with an interagency committee headed by her boss, Samuel R. “Sandy� Berger.

Government documents show that the NSC and oil companies worked together in June 1995 to forestall an attempt by Lebanese-American oil financier Roger Tamraz to promote his own pipeline from Baku to Turkey, via Armenia. Pennzoil’s Hamilton alerted NSC officials of oil company opposition to the Tamraz initiative, effectively killing any White House support for the project.�

One final comment and I'm done. This is also from today's Wall Street Journal:

This week's plea agreement by "super-lobbyist" Jack Abramoff has Republicans either rushing to return his campaign contributions in an act of cosmetic distancing, accuse Democrats of being equally corrupt, or embrace some new "lobbying reform" that would further insulate Members of Congress from political accountability.

Here's a better strategy: Banish the Abramoff crowd from polite Republican society, and start remembering why you were elected in the first place.

This isn't to say we agree with the media hype that the Abramoff scandal is of "historic proportions." That's true only if your "history" starts around 1994, after Jim Wright sold his "book" in bulk to the Teamsters, after Tony Coelho of "Honest Graft" fame, after Abscam, the Keating Five, Clark Clifford and BCCI, and any number of other famous episodes of Capitol Hill sleaze. Mr. Abramoff and his pals are stock Beltway characters. [emphasis added]

What's notable so far about this scandal is the wretchedness of the excess on display, as well as the fact that it involves self-styled "conservatives," who claimed to want to clean up Washington instead of cleaning up themselves. That some Republicans are just as corruptible as some Democrats won't surprise students of human nature. But it is an insult to the conservative voters who elected this class of Republicans and expected better.

Can't disagree with that either. If corrupt, throw them out but don't presume that this is a Republican Sleeze issue... toss them out on their butts: Democrat, Republican, Independent, whatever. They have no business in my United States Congress.

Espella Humanzee has more, including the embarassment of Hillary Clinton. No, Really!!

Linked to STACLU

Posted by GM Roper at January 6, 2006 06:52 AM | TrackBack