Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

WSJ: Cleaning House

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
 
question everything Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-08-06 02:29 AM
Original message
WSJ: Cleaning House
The Wall Street Journal

Cleaning House
January 6, 2006; Page A12

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.

(snip)

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.

(snip)

More broadly, however, the Abramoff scandal wouldn't resonate nearly as much with the public if it didn't fit a GOP pattern of becoming cozy with Beltway mores. The party that swept to power on term limits, spending restraint and reform has become the party of incumbency, 6,371 highway-bill "earmarks," and K Street. And it's no defense to say that Democrats would do the same. Of course Democrats would, but then they've always claimed to be the party of government. If that's what voters want, they'll choose the real thing.

One danger now is that, rather than change their own behavior, Republicans will think they can hide behind the political cover of "lobbying reform." While this has various guises, most proposals amount to putting further restrictions not on Congress but on "the right of the people . . . to petition the government," as the Constitution puts it explicitly. Lobbyists per se aren't the problem; most of them are hired to protect Americans from a federal government that wants to take more of their money or freedom. Mr. Abramoff could make so much hay with Indian tribes only because he and they knew that Congress had given Washington the power to make or break fortunes simply by re-discovering "lost" tribes and giving them the power to sponsor casino gambling. The root of the scandal is this Beltway discretion and its misuse, not the lobbyists who attempt to protect their own interests.

(snip)

URL for this article:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB113651045306039239.html (subscription)


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Up2Late Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-08-06 02:36 AM
Response to Original message
1. Wow, that's good...
I'm going to have to read all of that one if I can find a copy for free in a few days.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
punpirate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-08-06 02:41 AM
Response to Original message
2. What an immense crock...
... "Lobbyists per se aren't the problem; most of them are hired to protect Americans from a federal government that wants to take more of their money or freedom."

What a giant load a rubbish that is. The WSJ proves, once again, that their reporting will always be slanted toward big business, however fair it may seem at times, and in part.

Let's get real--most lobbyists are hired to make money for the wealthy and corporate clients via the government.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
question everything Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-08-06 02:46 AM
Response to Reply #2
4. Their reporting is good, actually, it is their editorial
that is slanted. Of course they will use this to attack the Democrats - in paragraphs that I removed - but they have been pretty consistent in chastising the Republicans for abandoning their "small government" once they got the opportunity to pig out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xxqqqzme Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-08-06 02:42 AM
Response to Original message
3. anf I thought it was about WSJ
cleaning house since their lips are locked on blivet's ass.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yknot Donating Member (215 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-08-06 03:10 AM
Response to Original message
5. More "we expect this from the democrats, but not the republicans" bullshit
Edited on Sun Jan-08-06 03:11 AM by yknot
This is the same tact peggy noonan tried to take; beat the shit out of us by asserting that these scandals are an aberration for republicans but SOP for democrats. Fuck the WSJ!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Arianrhod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-08-06 03:55 AM
Response to Original message
6. This is more pure crap from the right-wing.
"But it is an insult to the conservative voters who elected this class of Republicans and expected better."

The voters who put * into a second term knew precisely what they were voting for. If they're insulted, it's only because their chosen criminals got caught in the act.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ixion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-08-06 07:47 AM
Response to Reply #6
7. yeah, these were my thoughts as well...
that ol 'party of moral values' thing again. :eyes:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu May 02nd 2024, 07:52 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC