June 03, 2005
Fundraising at the White House

Once again, Lou Dubose advances the ball on things scandalicious and DeLay-related, this time documenting a political fundraiser at the White House involving disgraced lobbyist and DeLay crony Jack Abramoff and should-be-disgraced conservative activist Grover Norquist. Read and enjoy.

Some of you may note this story, which says that Democratic efforts to make political hay out of Les Affaires Abramoff may hit a snag due to some fundraising Abramoff did on behalf of several prominent Dems. Perhaps it will, but I'll simply note that the story makes no claim that there was anything illegal, unethical, or even potentially questionable in this activity. If anyone wants to advance the notion that any dealing at all with Abramoff is prima facie evidence of wrongdoing, I say go for it. I feel pretty confident in stating that the Republicans will come out on the short end of that particular stick.

All that said, if there is actual evidence of wrongdoing by Democrats in association with Abramoff, then go right ahead and bring on the investigations. I'm not in the business of excusing malfeasance. Following the rules isn't (or at least shouldn't be) a partisan issue. I'm for active ethics enforcement, and if that means a few casualties on my side, then so be it. They should know better, and I expect better of them.

Not that I'm too worried. By his nature and how he got where he is, Abramoff will be far more damaging to Republicans. As an example of what I mean, and as an extra special bonus, The Stakeholder ties the Dubose story back to Secretary of the Interior Gale Norton. Jack Abramoff is a gift that just keeps on giving, isn't he?

Posted by Charles Kuffner on June 03, 2005 to Scandalized! | TrackBack

Giving what exactly, though?

I mean, at some point, it's no substitute for an agenda that resonates with more voters than the R agenda, right?

Because as local pollster and strategist David Hill has pointed out in various columns, trying to claim a monopoly as "THE ethical party" doesn't especially attract voters long-term. Voters know better. :D

Posted by: kevin whited on June 3, 2005 9:04 AM