Breaking the slump of the holidays with a political snark

Abramoff is becoming an issue with some folks politically. Democrats are trying to make it an issue about republicans but that issue is far detached from reality.

Montana Senators Max Baucus, a Democrat, and Conrad Burns, a Republican, were the latest to return Abramoff-connected cash.

Baucus returned $18,892, including $1,892 he had failed to report for use of Abramoff's skybox at a Washington, D.C., sports arena.....

Senator Byron Dorgan, a North Dakota Democrat who, like Burns, sits on a congressional committee that oversees Indian tribes' issues, returned $67,000 in Abramoff-related donations a few days before Burns and Baucus gave back their campaign cash.....

But while DeLay limited his handouts to fellow Republicans, Abramoff spread his money around to lawmakers and candidates in both parties.

According to an analysis prepared by the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics, Abramoff and his clients doled out more than $4.4 million to candidates since 2000, with $1.5 million of the money going to Democrats.

While Democrats seek to taint Burns with the Abramoff scandal, the National Republican Senatorial Committee has gone on the offense, pointing out that Abramoff gave cash not only to Baucus, but to Harry Reid of Nevada, Senate minority leader and the Democrats' leader.

Yes folks, in the grand scheme of things 4.4 million dollars over two election cycles to multiple canidates isn't a lot. But what is very clear (and dare I say shocking) Is that Mr. Abramoff gave money to people who had the power to help him get things done *gasp*.

Now my good buddy Pat Hynes 'owever has some perspective problems which I am going to get to here right now.

I was around in 1994 when we won the House and the Senate for the first time in forty years. I recall distinctly using the phrase “K Street fat cats” in mail pieces against Democrat incumbents who, while not breaking any laws by cozying up to these sleaze ball lobbyists, certainly violated common decency by allowing them to draft their legislation and fund their political operations. The GOP of the Abramoff era behaved no differently, sad to say.

Pat thats the way the campaign finance system because of the stupid reforms works. The lobbyists keep the people in power in power and they get to help the members of congress who are to focused on keeping their jobs to DO their jobs. Its a good bit of political red meat in the old days when Power was so ensconsed in one set of hands but if you are compairing 06 to 94 you forget that 94 wasn't all about moral indignation. The Conservative movement had been working since the 70s trying to build up to 94. They've been out their fighting the good fight on the issues that mattered. They built up street cred on the promise of "A new way of doing buisness."

I don't think people would have thrown out the crooks without the promise of changing the way washington ran.

something Pat you seem to miss out on here....

Remember also that if you were a religious conservative, as I am (more or less) Abramoff had no use for you. Well, that’s not true. He did have a use for you. Abramoff literally used religious conservatives to help him enact policies that protected his casino clients. Consider Abramoff’s protégé Michael Scanlan’s formula for protecting his Indian gaming operation:

Pat let me ask you a serious question
From Abortion to protecting Christian Minorities being abused abroad how much more then a nice pat on the head do you guys really get? When push comes to shove does the republican leadership give you what you want or do they largely ignore it.

Religous conservatives are kept in the republican big tent because they can be a win or loss bloc on election day. But the republican leadership knows that they can also lose the other bloc's if they go to hog wild with you guys.

Again that is the reality of it.

Sensible republicans and insane moonbat democrats are going overboard on Abramoff.

He was a slimy lobbyist and slimed several people.

the end