Editore"s Note
Tilting at Windmills

Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

January 12, 2006
By: Kevin Drum

FAIRY TALES FROM THE RIGHT....John Boehner, candidate for Republican Majority Leader in the House:

If I am elected Majority Leader, there will no longer be a K Street project, or anything else like it.

Give me a break. The Republican Party would disintegrate if he magically got rid of the K Street project and "anything else like it." Who does he think he's kidding?

Kevin Drum 6:56 PM Permalink | Trackbacks | Comments (104)

Bookmark and Share
 
Comments

They'll change the name, and redesign the web site. It will be completely different, and be called something like "Government and the People Working Together". The checks will still come in on the usual dates, though.

Posted by: Joe Buck on January 12, 2006 at 6:58 PM | PERMALINK

Kinda funny how Republicans plan to go from arguing vehemently one moment that the K Street project was 110% A-OK and above board, to saying in the next moment that, well, it was a shameful problem, of course, but we've 110% reformed it and moved on, haven't you heard?

Will the media forget conveniently right along with them?

Why, of course -- news is what happens today, not what happened yesterday.

Posted by: frankly0 on January 12, 2006 at 7:04 PM | PERMALINK

Who does he think he's kidding?

The millions of gullible Republican voters who walk around with "Make a Fool of Me" t-shirts on every day?

Posted by: shortstop on January 12, 2006 at 7:05 PM | PERMALINK

Has anyone heard a peep out of Mitch "Money is free speech" McConnell since the wheels came off this particular bus?

Posted by: Global Citizen on January 12, 2006 at 7:12 PM | PERMALINK

I think it's time for all the Republican Representatives to admit they've been very, very bad boys and girls, and go stand in the corner for, oh, 2 years.

No talking! No voting! No secret amendments in the dead of night!

We'll let you know when you can come back out and be with the big kids again.

Posted by: craigie on January 12, 2006 at 7:13 PM | PERMALINK

When RINO Republican Chris Shays says this about Boehner: "The problem John faces is that he's so close to K Street." and declares he's voting for Blunt, a man whose marriage to a Philip Morris lobbyist gives new meaning to the phrase 'in bed with industry', you've just gotta end the charade.

Posted by: Coyote on January 12, 2006 at 7:13 PM | PERMALINK

In dealing with a painful issue, there are supposed to be a number of classic steps: Denial, anger, bargaining, depression, and acceptance.

How are the Republicans going to deal with the issue of their own corruption?

Why going straight from denial, jumping past all the other steps, and looping right back to denial again, claiming that the corruption has been "reformed".

People who believe them deserve them.

Posted by: frankly0 on January 12, 2006 at 7:14 PM | PERMALINK

a man whose marriage to a Philip Morris lobbyist

I bet that means they have the smoke before the sex. And probably during.

Posted by: craigie on January 12, 2006 at 7:14 PM | PERMALINK

Who does he think he's kidding?

The media. And it will work.

Posted by: Brad Plumer on January 12, 2006 at 7:14 PM | PERMALINK

I bet that means they have the smoke before the sex. And probably during.

But not necessarily that the sex is smokin'.

Posted by: shortstop on January 12, 2006 at 7:15 PM | PERMALINK

shortstop: The millions of gullible Republican voters who walk around with "Make a Fool of Me" t-shirts on every day?

And the brain-dead, scripted, programmed, Bush-bootlicking, neo-brownshirt mental slave trolls who will be posting here any minute that (1) there was never any such thing as the K Street Project, it is just a lefty moonbat fantasy, and (2) there was nothing wrong with the K Street Project, and (3) the determination of the Republicans to do away with the K Street Project proves that they are the party of clean government and that's why Democrats can't win elections, and (4) AL GORE! BUDDHIST TEMPLE!! DAN RATHER!!! MICHAEL MOORE!!!!

Posted by: SecularAnimist on January 12, 2006 at 7:16 PM | PERMALINK

Where's he been for years? The Project was a disgrace from day one. Which Republicans have been publically critical of it prior to this scandal? I really want to know, because I will be impressed.

That party is pathetic. We need at least two viable political parties, but boy is this a heavy price to pay.

The Republicans behave as though they all still live at home with Daddy and nobody dare oppose Daddy. They need to grow up and be contributing adults.

Posted by: little ole jim from red country on January 12, 2006 at 7:23 PM | PERMALINK

craigie: I bet that means they have the smoke before the sex. And probably during.

shortstop: But not necessarily that the sex is smokin'.

Probably because they spend too much time trying to keep the ashtray from sliding off the top of Blunt's head or something...

Posted by: grape_crush on January 12, 2006 at 7:26 PM | PERMALINK

SecularAnimist on January 12, 2006 at 7:16 PM:

...the determination of the Republicans to do away with the K Street Project proves that they are the party of clean government...

Which is bringing up something that's been kinda bothering me: Where are the reform proposals from the Dems? Everything I've heard about so far is coming from the Repub side of the aisle, which kinda strikes me as letting the foxes determine how they are going to take charge of the hen house.

Posted by: grape_crush on January 12, 2006 at 7:31 PM | PERMALINK

Republicans have sex?

Next you will be telling me that George Bush has a Ph. D. in Philology.

Posted by: lib on January 12, 2006 at 7:31 PM | PERMALINK

grape_crush: Which is bringing up something that's been kinda bothering me: Where are the reform proposals from the Dems?

There's only one reform proposal that the Democrats need to offer. It's called the midterm elections of November 2006.

Posted by: SecularAnimist on January 12, 2006 at 7:35 PM | PERMALINK
Where are the reform proposals from the Dems? Everything I've heard about so far is coming from the Repub side of the aisle, which kinda strikes me as letting the foxes determine how they are going to take charge of the hen house.

The Democrats aren't proposing legislative reforms because the problems aren't mainly that the existing laws are inadequate on their face, it is that the Republicans are breaking them left and right.

The Democratic reform package is "put us in charge, and we'll make sure the laws get enforced."

Posted by: cmdicely on January 12, 2006 at 7:43 PM | PERMALINK

One of the neatest tricks in the reportaire of Republicans is to ask stupid questions whose answer is obvious to all but the congenital idiots.

One of the stupidest habits of Democrats is to waste time in trying to answer such questions in a calm and rational manner.

Posted by: lib on January 12, 2006 at 7:45 PM | PERMALINK

The Dems take over and its business as usual. Nothing changes cause K street is still majority Democrat.

Posted by: berlins on January 12, 2006 at 7:49 PM | PERMALINK

One of the neatest tricks in the reportaire of Republicans is to ask stupid questions whose answer is obvious to all but the congenital idiots.

One of the stupidest habits of Democrats is to waste time in trying to answer such questions in a calm and rational manner.

The most blatant trick of the REPUKELISCUM lately is the "ROLLING LIE" strategy or the "ALTERNATING LIE".

1) They begin with Lie #1.

2) You say "That's a lie".

3) The REPUKELISCUM agrees, and switches to Lie #2.

4) You say, "That's a lie"

5) The REPUKELISCUM agrees, and switches to Lie #1.

This can go on for hours. Talking to these REPUKELISCUM is like the old WHACKAMOLE game.

Posted by: POed Liberal on January 12, 2006 at 7:51 PM | PERMALINK

I hope it happens.

I like flying monkeys.

Posted by: Quaker in a Basement on January 12, 2006 at 7:56 PM | PERMALINK

rofl - to me all it means is that he's a mole for the other guy running, as that's the only conceivable reason a republican would run on an "honesty platform"

Posted by: cdj on January 12, 2006 at 8:00 PM | PERMALINK

Who does he think he's kidding? Kevin Drum

Some of the people, all of the time.

Posted by: Eric Paulsen on January 12, 2006 at 8:04 PM | PERMALINK

Ralph Nader had a valid point about the "permanent corporate government" not changing regardless of which party is in power. The overpowering influence of big money and big business on government is not going away unless and until there is more radical change than the Democrats are likely to bring if they were to regain control of the legislature and / or the presidency.

Having said that, the blatant and extreme corruption that we are seeing in today's Republican Party and the branches of government that it controls goes far beyond the "business as usual" corporate influence. It is not just "like" having the Mafia or some other criminal gang running the government -- it is having a criminal gang running the government.

That's the message that I wish the Democrats would embrace: the Republican Party of today is no longer a "political party" in the normal sense of that term; it is a criminal gang posing as a political party.

Posted by: SecularAnimist on January 12, 2006 at 8:09 PM | PERMALINK

grape_crush,

Probably because they spend too much time trying to keep the ashtray from sliding off the top of Blunt's head or something...

ROTFLMAO.

Posted by: Edo on January 12, 2006 at 8:10 PM | PERMALINK

Kevin: "Who does [John Boehner] think he's kidding?"

The GOP's heretofore gullible base voter, who's obviously becoming more disconcerted as these Republican scandals continue to unfold. The real question is how many more times can the GOP dip into this reservoir of residual good will before it dries up in disgust?

Posted by: Donald from Hawaii on January 12, 2006 at 8:24 PM | PERMALINK

In 50 years, when they're talking about "The Republican Revolution" in history class, let's all remember how it happened.

They cheated. A lot. Way more than ANY other American political party ever cheated (until you go back to the Mason/Antimason debacle).

Posted by: Osama_Been_Forgotten on January 12, 2006 at 8:34 PM | PERMALINK

Howard Dean (as per usual) said it best during the primaries:

"You can't trust Republicans with your money!"

Heh, remember all the crap he took when he characterized Republicans as criminals? Something r-eally d-ense w-ingnut loves to throw around when "Look! A puppy!"ing away from the central point in an argument.

Somebody with the actual quote in archive toss it up here.

Of course, nowadays, the man looks -- once again -- like nothing so much as a prophet in the proper Old Testament style :)

I am *so damn glad* the little doctor from Vermont is the chair of the DNC.

Bob

Posted by: rmck1 on January 12, 2006 at 8:35 PM | PERMALINK

cmdicely on January 12, 2006 at 7:43 PM:

The Democrats aren't proposing legislative reforms because...make sure the laws get enforced.

If that is the Dems' message, then:

A) It's a weak one, on its 'face',
B) It's not getting heard,
C) It's too easy for their opposition to play the 'Dems do it too' game, and
D) IMHO, the existing laws are violated too easily and enforcement is lacking, so, yes, I'd like to see more than just a 'trust us and vote for us' message...more specifics please...Just exactly how would the Dems go about cleaning thins up, for example.

Posted by: grape_crush on January 12, 2006 at 8:37 PM | PERMALINK

That's the message that I wish the Democrats would embrace: the Republican Party of today is no longer a "political party" in the normal sense of that term; it is a criminal gang posing as a political party.
Posted by: SecularAnimist on January 12, 2006 at 8:09 PM | PERMALINK

Unfortunately, the Dems will not do this. Most have their own dirty laundry. And the ones that don't, and are making noise (like Howard Dean) are being ignored by the Corporate Dominated Mainstream Media.

Posted by: Osama_Been_Forgotten on January 12, 2006 at 8:37 PM | PERMALINK

jim from red country:
Where's he been for years? The Project was a disgrace from day one. Which Republicans have been publically critical of it prior to this scandal? I really want to know, because I will be impressed.

Bingo. All of a sudden, these guys have a conscience? That's the smell of elections that's making them act this way - they didn't seem to have a problem with this stuff before.

cdj:
to me all it means is that he's a mole for the other guy running, as that's the only conceivable reason a republican would run on an "honesty platform

This occurred to me too. Though it would look funny for the Repubs to deliberately elect the guy who wasn't promising to clean up. Or it would, if anyone was paying attention. Look over there! Brad and Angelina!

Posted by: craigie on January 12, 2006 at 8:43 PM | PERMALINK

Edo on January 12, 2006 at 8:10 PM:

ROTFLMAO.

Thanks. It was either that or the "Don't pull on my ears, I know what I'm doing"-tattooed-on-the-forehead line.

Posted by: grape_crush on January 12, 2006 at 8:44 PM | PERMALINK

George Will says John Boehner is terrific because he has never inserted "earmarks" into a bill. Well, that's nice... Now that Boehner has said what he said, we can hold him to it as a stick if he gets elected (Blunt is just a DeLay lite.) The most important thing is, that Boehner felt the need to say that there wouldn't be a K Street Project, and what that says about Public and media awareness of the situation and it's evils (Will noted that before the scandals, only a very few of us - eg those who didn't read WaMo, Mother Jones or The Nation - had even heard of the KSP.

Posted by: Neil' on January 12, 2006 at 8:45 PM | PERMALINK

Osama:

Except Howard *did* smack the living shit out of the hapless Volf Blizah the other day over the issue of Democrats allegedly taking Abramoff money.

Bob

Posted by: rmck1 on January 12, 2006 at 8:53 PM | PERMALINK

Volf Blizah = Volf Blitzah

Posted by: rmck1 on January 12, 2006 at 8:54 PM | PERMALINK

Neil': Those of us in Missouri have been refering to Roy Blunt as "Roy Blunt, (R-K Street)" for a couple of years now.

Posted by: Global Citizen on January 12, 2006 at 8:56 PM | PERMALINK

Except Howard *did* smack the living shit out of the hapless Volf Blizah the other day over the issue of Democrats allegedly taking Abramoff money.
Posted by: rmck1 on January 12, 2006 at 8:53 PM | PERMALINK

Yes. And is that incident getting any airplay? Is what Dean said making it's way into the American Zeitgeist at all? No. It is not. The Mighty Wurlitzer speaks again.

Posted by: Osama_Been_Forgotten on January 12, 2006 at 8:58 PM | PERMALINK

Anyone have a link for that interview? I missed it myself.

Posted by: Global Citizen on January 12, 2006 at 9:13 PM | PERMALINK

The Republican Party would disintegrate if he magically got rid of the K Street project and "anything else like it."

At the present time, I expect that the Republican party would benefit considerably from a serious effort to be and look more ethical. I believe that has been the recent message of, among others, George Will and Newt Gingrich.

Posted by: contentious on January 12, 2006 at 9:16 PM | PERMALINK

Global:

Try here

Or a good summary is here

Posted by: craigie on January 12, 2006 at 9:20 PM | PERMALINK

Newt Gingrich... hmmm, sounds familiar. Wasn't he censured by the House for not declaring $300,000 in bribes, er, donations?

Yes, I believe he was.

Yup, he's just the guy to set these crooks straight.

Posted by: craigie on January 12, 2006 at 9:21 PM | PERMALINK

Thanks Craigie. Actually I just found it - I added "Abramoff" to "CNN, Wolf Blitzer, Howard Dean" and there it was. I'm putting it up on my site.

Posted by: Global Citizen on January 12, 2006 at 9:23 PM | PERMALINK

The GOP is wholly about fantasy and corporate give aways these days so it doesn't strike me as remarkable or even bloggable that this guy says K-street tactics will be a thing of the past.

Posted by: The fake Fake Al on January 12, 2006 at 9:23 PM | PERMALINK

More on that splendid Newt fellow

Some role models you guys have.

Posted by: craigie on January 12, 2006 at 9:24 PM | PERMALINK

I never did trust any fella named after a primordial salamander...

Posted by: Global Citizen on January 12, 2006 at 9:26 PM | PERMALINK

Republicans have sex? Posted by: lib on January 12, 2006 at 7:31 PM | PERMALINK

And evidently, reproduce. Twenty plus years ago, back in the Reagan days, I just assumed that they would...die out. Then at some point I started noticing Young Republican clubs on campus.

I reacted in the only way I could -- I became even more liberal.

Posted by: e. henry thripshaw on January 12, 2006 at 9:30 PM | PERMALINK

...At the present time, I expect that the Republican party would benefit considerably from a serious effort to be and look more ethical....
Posted by: contentious on January 12, 2006 at 9:16 PM | PERMALINK

What's the difference? (between "being" and "looking" more ethical)

More importantly; can you (and other republican voters) tell the difference?

I submit that most can't.

Which is how we got here in the first place.

One should be able to tell simply by looking at the positions of the politican or party in question. If they favor monied interests almost exclusively - no matter how well-intentioned the supposed justification (ie. "moral values" or "free market" or "small government") - it's most likely that they seem more ethical simply because they LOOK more ethical. Because the looker (ie. republican voter) in this case is either blind, stupid, a religious fanatic, pro-authoritarian, suffers from irrational liberal hatred syndrome, or never took an ethics or civics class in school.

Posted by: Osama_Been_Forgotten on January 12, 2006 at 9:38 PM | PERMALINK

Osama:

EXCELLENT point about how wanting to "look" more ethical says nothing whatsoever about BEING more ethical.

The people who are calling for a cosmetic change here should realize that, as Frank Zappa sez, NOBODY looks good in brown lipstick.

Bob

Posted by: rmck1 on January 12, 2006 at 9:45 PM | PERMALINK

Osama:

Hey, I used to *own* a Wurlitzer electric piano way back in the paleodigital era.

Okay okay, it's cheesier in nearly every way than a Fender Rhodes, but it was *helluva lot* less expensive.

Bob

Posted by: rmck1 on January 12, 2006 at 9:48 PM | PERMALINK

Speaking of gullible Republican voters. I was having a conversation from my brother, who lives in a liberal working class district of (far) northern California. I was making my usual noises about the Republicans (it had to do with the fact that the only thing I have against my nephew-in-law taking care of my mother is that his parents are Republicans) when he said that his best friends, whom I know and like are Republicans, and actually voted for GWB in the last election. These are bright and good people, one of whom was an active member of the City Council of the town in question, and I would vote for her. I was stunned; first that they were Republicans, but I guess that's possible, and second that they actually voted in California for the shubista, which is unbelievable.

The point is that there is still a fund of people who vote Republican who are actually decent and don't know better.

Life is weird.

Posted by: Knut Wicksell on January 12, 2006 at 9:49 PM | PERMALINK

Hello berlins! If only all Republicans said things this stupid:

The Dems take over and its business as usual. Nothing changes cause K street is still majority Democrat.

The website of the K Street Project's current headline:

Democratic Congressmen Lobby Too
January 12 2006 5:10 PM
Former Representative Max Sandlin (D-TX) is a new lobbyist for Greenberg Traurig in their Houston, TX office.

Notice two points here: 1. They have given up the transparent lie that the K Street Project itself is bipartisan; they now merely argue that "Democrats lobby too". (They don't even argue that Democrats get indicted for bribery or money laundering in connection with lobbying; Democrats may lobby, but only Republicans do so feloniously.) 2. They had to go clear to Houston to find a Democratic lobbyist, because there aren't any left on K Street.

And, one final point: in case there was any doubt about the K Street Project being a GOP political arm, of the most vicious sort, this should dispel it.

Posted by: brooksfoe on January 12, 2006 at 10:01 PM | PERMALINK

The Democratic reform package is "put us in charge, and we'll make sure the laws get enforced."
Posted by: cmdicely on January 12, 2006 at 7:43 PM | PERMALINK

Yup. Like in the good old days when you used to control Congress.

Posted by: McAristotle on January 12, 2006 at 10:16 PM | PERMALINK

I'll take Jim Wright's malfeasance over these scurilous fucks any day.

Posted by: Global Citizen on January 12, 2006 at 10:19 PM | PERMALINK

Has anyone sent a 'tip' to the K Street Project boys? They have a nice lil 'tip' link on the left side of the screen so go for it.

Posted by: WhoSays on January 12, 2006 at 10:23 PM | PERMALINK

Global:

OMG, remeber the HOUSE BANKING SCANDAL?

ROTFL !

Seems like quite the trip down memory lane, don't it ...

Hey, I'll trade you twelve Rostenkowskis and six Wrights for a quarter of an Abramoff and half a Scanlon. And I'll see you three Trafficants.

Memories ...

Bob

Posted by: rmck1 on January 12, 2006 at 10:26 PM | PERMALINK

I used to own a Wurlitzer but then my Kurzweil developed consciousness, became jealous of it, and subsumed its technological distinctiveness.

I wish I could play the cool new Kurzweilitzer but all it does now is sit around dreaming of immortality and wondering if there is a God.

Posted by: trex on January 12, 2006 at 10:26 PM | PERMALINK

Political corruption is a chicken and egg proposition. Were they corrupt before they got into office? Or did they become corrupt as a result of being in office.

And for all of you who think that restoration of Democratic rule will somehow take care of the problem, I'd like to ask if you recall the former Senate Majority/Minority Leader. Yep, old home boy Tom Daschle. Funny thing about how after 9/11, the Congress was so quick on the draw to appropriate billions to the survivors of the attacks, just so long as they didn't sue the airlines. Check the size of the payments to some parentsnot just wives and children, but parents of the victims, without regard to whether they defended on the victim for supportand you will see multi-million dollar payouts. You might wonder about that, especially when you consider what the survivors of American military personnel killed in combat get. In one of those real coincidences, Tom Daschle's wife was a big-time lobbiest for the airline industry.

Yeah, the Repugs are dirty, perhaps the dirtiest ever, but this isn't limited to them.

Posted by: Nixon Did It on January 12, 2006 at 10:37 PM | PERMALINK

Attention everyone who lives above the bridge...and uses a real email...this trolling email just arrived in my inbox. It is from a group that calls Donald Wildmon their "Mand of the Year" and I don't want them to get any hits on their site from unsuspecting liberals. Junk the email, don't open it.

just getting back to you from a post in the washington monthly last
summer
about Hillary or somthun

website got moved yo:

http://pissedoffwhitemen.

Posted by: Global Citizen on January 12, 2006 at 10:43 PM | PERMALINK

trex:

Like the cleverly-misnamed Korg line of moderately-priced synthesizers -- you, too, will be digitally assimilated.

And your vintage Hammond B-3, too. Who needs photovoltaics when you've got sampled clone wheels, eh?

And before the phrase "Yamaha DX-7" crawls off your lips, place the blame where it properly belongs -- on the goddamned Mellotron.

Here ... lemme suck out your soul onto these little tape loops.

Bob

Posted by: rmck1 on January 12, 2006 at 10:46 PM | PERMALINK

Yeah, the Repugs are dirty, perhaps the dirtiest ever, but this isn't limited to them.

Completely eliminating corporate money and influence from American life would require the use of artillery and air power to reduce the headquarters of every American company to rubble, followed by an intensive "clear and hold" counterinsurgency operation, using small groups of infantry to seek out and destroy remaining pockets of middle management, combined with coordinated reconstruction and aid operations to win the "hearts and minds" of the population. Some mass relocation of inhabitants of corporate-sympathizing neighborhoods into defensible corporate-free "strategic hamlets" may be necessary to separate corporate insurgents from their popular base.

I am in favor of such an operation, but we first have to get Democrats elected in order to create a climate more favorable for further offensive initiatives.

Posted by: brooksfoe on January 12, 2006 at 10:49 PM | PERMALINK

The Dems take over and its business as usual. Nothing changes cause K street is still majority Democrat.

Umm... you do know what the 'K Street Project' is, who thought it up, who enforced it, and its primary goal, don't you?

No, I guess you don't.

Here's a little history for you.

DeLay, Santorum, and their associates organized a systematic campaign, closely monitored by Republicans on Capitol Hill and by Grover Norquist and the Republican National Committee, to put pressure on firms not just to hire Republicans but also to fire Democrats. With the election of Bush, this pressure became stronger. A Republican lobbyist told me, "Having the White House" has made it more possible for DeLay and Santorum "to enforce the K Street Project." Several Democratic lobbyists have been pushed out of their jobs as a result; business associations who hire Democrats for prominent positions have been subject to retribution. They are told that they won't be able to see the people on Capitol Hill they want to see. Sometimes the retribution is more tangible. The Republican lobbyist I spoke to said, "There's a high state of sensitivity to the partisanship of the person you hire for these jobs that did not exist five, six years agoyou hire a Democrat at your peril."

Now... you were saying?

Posted by: stranger on January 12, 2006 at 10:50 PM | PERMALINK

Osama_been_fergettin:>"the Dems will not do this. Most have their own dirty laundry."

You're comparing the day-old socks of the Democrats to the poopy diapers of the Republicans?

I guess it depends on your definition of 'dirty.'


Posted by: Joey Giraud on January 12, 2006 at 10:52 PM | PERMALINK

Your are mistaking the K Street Project with the rest of K Street. Do you think that K street is not chocked full of Democrats doing the same things as Repulicans? Right, only the Republican are felons!

Give me a break. The Republican Party would disintegrate if he magically got rid of the K Street project and "anything else like it." Who does he think he's kidding?

Didn't the Republipukes get majority status in the House without the K street project.

Posted by: berlins on January 12, 2006 at 10:59 PM | PERMALINK

Just for the record, I'm not prejudiced, I hate everybody, so to speak.

Any Dem's caught with their hands in the cookie jar need to pay the same price. I want that rarest of creatures, the honest politician, not the namby-pamby, boot-lickin', self-preservation obsessed stuffed shirts that we have now.

Clean up congress...Without DeLay.

Posted by: Global Citizen on January 12, 2006 at 11:05 PM | PERMALINK

berlins:

Yes, in fact they did. By running against a Democratic "culture of corruption" it took them 40 years to inculcate at the congressional majority party.

The Bush Republicans reduced the turnaround time by about 35 years.

Bob

Posted by: rmck1 on January 12, 2006 at 11:07 PM | PERMALINK

So he's an idiot that would destroy the republican discipline in the house . . . and we should support his candidacy.

Posted by: Jeremy on January 12, 2006 at 11:09 PM | PERMALINK

Joey Giraud: You're comparing the day-old socks of the Democrats to the poopy diapers of the Republicans?

I hate to be agreeable but that's a pretty good line.

Posted by: contentious on January 12, 2006 at 11:13 PM | PERMALINK

Which is bringing up something that's been kinda bothering me: Where are the reform proposals from the Dems?

Barney Frank had a good one and the other Dems squashed it. In fact, the Democrats do not seem to be in favor of reform.

Posted by: contentious on January 12, 2006 at 11:16 PM | PERMALINK

Stranger,

The Democrats are firmly entrenched as lobbyist in K street. There is an over abundance of them not shortages. Do you know what they are refering to when the say K street as opposed to the K Street Project?
Your whinning about some hard ball politics. You think that Democrats don't do the same things.

Posted by: berlins on January 12, 2006 at 11:22 PM | PERMALINK

Why should the Dem's be the lifeguards here? Let the fuckers drown.

Posted by: Global Citizen on January 12, 2006 at 11:22 PM | PERMALINK

"You can't trust Republicans with your money!"

That's why Republicans want to keep tax rates low. They don't trust themselves with "your" money. However, most of the government's money comes from rich and way above average incomes. Not very much of it is "yours" to start with. Not very much scientific research or outfitting of aircraft carriers is paid for by the below-median incomes.

Posted by: contentious on January 12, 2006 at 11:23 PM | PERMALINK

Bob,

Yes, in fact they did. By running against a Democratic "culture of corruption" it took them 40 years to inculcate at the congressional majority party.

No Bob, It took one person, Bill Clinton. Now, can the Republicans survive George Bush.

Posted by: berlins on January 12, 2006 at 11:26 PM | PERMALINK

What's the difference? (between "being" and "looking" more ethical)

Does everybody here fail to read the word "and"?

Posted by: contentious on January 12, 2006 at 11:28 PM | PERMALINK

I have to agree with Berlins (what IS the "s" for?) on this one. ALL politicians seek money, because money conveys power. And corruption in turn seeks out power. Democrats and Republicans, it's all the same, it just depends on whether or not YOU, the person choosing to be left or right, is also corrupted by the idea of power. Once people realize this, they will stop being Democrats or republicans, and start demanding real people power. Dilute the power, and the corruption is diluted.

Posted by: Chris on January 12, 2006 at 11:28 PM | PERMALINK

K Street is a location.

The K Street Project is the brainchild of Tom DeLay. Let's keep that clear and not conflate the issues here to take some of the aroma off the republican turd, shall we try that honesty thing I alluded to earlier?

Posted by: Global Citizen on January 12, 2006 at 11:33 PM | PERMALINK

So, to keep Global Citizen's comment in mind, both Democrats and republicans are well represented on K Street. Both parties' members lust after money, becasue money assures re-election, and power. "K Street Project" is just a phase, one that will be undone by its own excess. But K Street is the REAL problem.

Posted by: Chris on January 12, 2006 at 11:35 PM | PERMALINK

I didn't say the K Street Project was "just a phase" and indeed I take exception to that. I believe this is the worst it's ever been. This was a blatant power grab and disenfranchisement of opposition interests.

That is, quite plainly, un-fucking-American.

Posted by: Global Citizen on January 12, 2006 at 11:38 PM | PERMALINK

AmericaBLOG had a good rant about the dishonesty of the Bush administration today.

Posted by: Global Citizen on January 12, 2006 at 11:40 PM | PERMALINK

I never said YOu said that, GC....i am saying that what goes up (K Street Project, New Democrats) must come down again. The excesses of each party always manage to fuel the excesses of the opposite power. The concept of elections going to the highest bidder is the problem. Lobbying, influence buying, but also influence peddling (remember, if we has truly honest politicians, we would not have lobbyists!) is the problem. K Street Project is not that much different from democratic Power grabbing over the last 40 years. THEY...ARE....ALL....BAD....both parties.

Posted by: Chris on January 12, 2006 at 11:47 PM | PERMALINK

Global Citizen on January 12, 2006 at 11:22 PM:

Let the fuckers drown.

Um, not while I'm on board the same ship as they...Nope.

contentious on January 12, 2006 at 11:16 PM

In fact, the Democrats do not seem to be in favor of reform.

Thanks for prompting me to get up off my ass and do a little research...See, when someone says something like "In fact" before stating their opinion, I start wondering...

[snip]

Lobbying and Ethics Reform Act of 2005 (S. 1398, H.R. 2412). Sponsored by Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wis. and Rep. Marty Meehan, D-Mass.

- Imposes tougher disclosure requirements on both Members of Congress and registered lobbyists.
- Extends from one to two years the ban on former very senior and senior executive personnel, former Members of Congress, and officers and employees of the legislative branch to engage in lobbying activities with any officer or employee of the entity in which such person served before his or her tenure terminated.
- Requires public disclosure by Members of Congress of employment negotiations.
- Requires Senators to provide full payment and specified disclosure of charter flights.
- Requires Members of Congress to provide increased disclosure of his or her official travel.
- Prohibits Members of Congress from accepting gifts from lobbyists.

Lobbying Gift Ban Act of 2005 (H.R. 3177). Sponsored by Rep. George Miller, D-Calif.

- Prohibits lobbyists from making gifts to Members of Congress
- Gifts are defined as follows:

Gratuities
Favors
Discounts
Entertainment
Hospitality
Loans
Forbearance
Anything with monetary value
Services
Training
Transportation
Lodging and meals

Lobbying Transparency and Accountability Act of 2005 (S. 2128, H.R. 4575). Sponsored by Rep. Christopher Shays, R-Conn.; and Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz.

- Requires faster reporting of lobbying expenditures and greater public access to reports filed by lobbyists and their employers.
- Increases disclosure of lobbying activities, including grass-roots lobbying.
- Increases disclosure by lobbyists, lawmakers and congressional staff of travel arranged or financed by lobbyists or clients.
- Requires lawmakers to pay fair market value for travel on private aircraft and tickets to sporting or entertainment events.

Democratic House Rules Package - Sponsored by Reps. David Obey, D-Wis., Barney Frank, D-Mass., David Price, D-N.C., and Tom Allen, D-Maine

- Prohibits lobbyists from paying for or arranging congressional travel.
- Prohibits former House members from lobbying on the House floor.
- Prohibits Members of Congress from accepting travel or lodging reimbursements unless they obtained a declaration from the sponsor that no lobbyists were participating in the trip and that the sponsor does not employ or contract for the services of a lobbyist.

[unsnip]

So to state something like "Democrats do not seem to be in favor of reform" as a fact is, well, asinine...

However, what I Googled up still makes one of my earlier points: Why do I seem to only hear about the Repub proposals for reform?...Oh, I think I might already have an answer to that one...

Posted by: grape_crush on January 12, 2006 at 11:54 PM | PERMALINK

contentious:

> "You can't trust Republicans with your money!"

> That's why Republicans want to keep tax rates low. They
> don't trust themselves with "your" money. However, most
> of the government's money comes from rich and way above
> average incomes. Not very much of it is "yours" to start
> with. Not very much scientific research or outfitting of
> aircraft carriers is paid for by the below-median incomes.

This is just talking-point, thoroughly debunked bullshit.
As people here never tire of pointing out, the government
has grown under Bush at a faster rate than it grew under
Clinton. Bush doesn't use the veto pen, nor does he seem to
care about the kind of deficits that used to agitate principled
Republicans. This is why K Street is such a problem; the
Republicans no longer know how to say no to government spending.

As for where the tax burden falls, your point above is also
much-debunked bullshit. I forget exactly which one, but it's
from a right-wing analysis that uses bogus numbers. The tax
burden falls disproportionately on the middle and upper-middle
class. As a percentage of total wealth rather than just income,
the nubers look even worse in terms of where the burden falls.

> "Yes, in fact they did. By running against a Democratic
> "culture of corruption" it took them 40 years to
> inculcate at the congressional majority party.

> No Bob, It took one person, Bill Clinton.
> Now, can the Republicans survive George Bush.

You apparently don't remember Jim
Wright and the House Banking Scandal.

Bob

Posted by: rmck1 on January 12, 2006 at 11:56 PM | PERMALINK

Newt was so god-damned high and mighty, and it turns out he was getting his dick sucked at the same time - so if he was asked, he could honestly say he "didn't sleep with her."

Now he has the balls to lecture the democrats on ethics? Gimme Wright, Rostenkowski, et al any flippin' day. And Newt? He can slither back under a rock.

I'm not to the term limits point yet, but I want real reform that has teeth. I want violation of the public trust to be a punishable crime. I want a European-style no confidence vote. I want a lot of things that would really make a difference, and given that fact, they won't happen.

Posted by: Global Citizen on January 12, 2006 at 11:59 PM | PERMALINK

Chris:

Lobbying is in fact explicitly protected by the Constitution. We are allowed to petition the govenrment for a redress of grievances.

Forget which Article that's in, but it's there in black and white.

Lobbying isn't the problem.

Making money off of lobbing ("rent-seeking") is the problem.

Bob

Posted by: rmck1 on January 13, 2006 at 12:00 AM | PERMALINK

Okay, full disclosure - I wouldn't literally let anyone drown, but I don't see this as a problem that necessarily the Dems need to have the solutions for. Engage the "Quiet Man" approach for a while. That always makes people nervous.

As always, this has been fun. But I have to call it a night. See you next time around. Sweet Dreams everyone.

Posted by: Global Citizen on January 13, 2006 at 12:05 AM | PERMALINK

G'night, Global.

A pleasure as always.

Bob

Posted by: rmck1 on January 13, 2006 at 12:22 AM | PERMALINK

For a very comprehensive look at what Republicans had to say about the K Street Project a few short years ago, back when they where K Street Rockstars, please look at Billmon's Whiskey Bar.

http://billmon.org/

Here's a short sampling of Quotes:

The Washington office of Preston Gates Ellis & Rouvelas Meeds, a Seattle-based law firm, keeps adding Republicans . . . Earlier this year, Preston Gates hired Jack Abramoff, a high-powered Republican with impeccable conservative credentials.
National Journal
From the K Street Corridor
April 8, 1995


If a Republican era began in 1994, Jack Abramoff is K Street's future . . . Abramoff has given himself the tough task of advancing the goals of the conservative revolution while also making money. ''They agreed that I could work on things that were important to me,'' Abramoff said.
National Journal
Jack Abramoff: A Lobbyist
With a Line to Capitol Hill
July 29, 1995

Some insiders have already bet on the Republicans. This summer the Association of American Railroads hired a Republican, Edward R. Hamberger, as president; and the new head of AT&T Corp's Washington office, James W. Cicconi, was a top official in the Bush White House. ''These groups really drive K Street,'' says Jack Abramoff, a Republican lobbyist with the law firm of Preston Gates Ellis & Rouvelas Meeds.
National Journal
K Street, That GOP Street?
September 19, 1998

Lobbyist Jack Abramoff and his book of lucrative clients and GOP connections are leaving Preston Gates Ellis and Rouvelas Meeds 12/31 to join Greenberg Traurig. Abramoff, a member of the kitchen cabinet of House Maj. Whip Tom DeLay (R-TX), plans to bring about 10 lobbyists with him . . . Greenberg Traurig nat'l gov't chair Fred Baggett: "We're heavy into substance lobbyists. Jack is heavy into the relationship side."
Hotline
Career Track: Abramoff and Running
December 14, 2000

Now comes word that Jack Abramoff, the firm's star GOP lobbyist, has jumped ship to Greenberg Traurig and plans to take up to 15 folks with him. " They're completely Republican-less with a Republican House, Senate and president," one source crowed about Preston Gates.

Posted by: troll on January 13, 2006 at 1:50 AM | PERMALINK

So, to keep Global Citizen's comment in mind, both Democrats and republicans are well represented on K Street. Both parties' members lust after money, becasue money assures re-election, and power. "K Street Project" is just a phase, one that will be undone by its own excess. But K Street is the REAL problem.

Posted by: Sam on January 13, 2006 at 3:48 AM | PERMALINK

Sam:

The K Street Project is a quantum leap above normal K Street practices.

It is unprecedented and totally, intentionally partisan.

Bob

Posted by: rmck1 on January 13, 2006 at 4:18 AM | PERMALINK

rmck1 and trex,

One word: Mellotron. ;)

Posted by: Gregory on January 13, 2006 at 9:22 AM | PERMALINK

That's why Republicans want to keep tax rates low. They don't trust themselves with "your" money.

No, but they do like to use your credit cards.

And sorry rmck1, I see you had the Mellotron covered. But I still dig John Paul Jones using it on those Led Zep albums. :)

Posted by: Gregory on January 13, 2006 at 9:26 AM | PERMALINK

Gregory:

Oh no, I was only dissing the Mellotron facetiously. I was ripping on sampling, which wound up doing away with all those great clunky, funky analog keyboards.

The Mellotron was only the original sampling keyboard, only with tape loops, not memory chips.

Sheesh, you think spinning tone wheels with photovoltaic sensors to read the holes in the rim are a are a bizarre way to generate sounds, how about all those Slinkys inside a Clavinet :)

Bob

Posted by: rmck1 on January 13, 2006 at 9:56 AM | PERMALINK

A good piece of "anti-corruption" legislation would prohibit lobbying firms from discriminating on the basis of political affiliation. Run it up the flagpole and see what Boehner has to say.

Posted by: Artie on January 13, 2006 at 10:21 AM | PERMALINK

Some of the people, all of the time. Posted by: Eric Paulsen on January 12, 2006 at 8:04 PM

Unfortunately they head to the polls every election and dutifully pull the "R" lever like good little robots. Even at 25% of the eligible voters it's enough to turn an election.

Posted by: Dr. Morpheus on January 13, 2006 at 10:58 AM | PERMALINK

Wanted to answer Kevin's question: Who does he think he's kidding?

The American People. Fooled them for awhile, why not do it again?

One other issue that's clear is that a lot of Democrats are captured by the system. Jim Moran has voted corporate on the bankruptcy bill and everything else. Steny Hoyer boasts about his connections to lobbyists. The only way to fix that is to knock off some of these guys in the primaries - and that's going to be bloody.

But I can't see another way of addressing the issue: if you don't like the system - vote against it.

Posted by: Samuel Knight on January 13, 2006 at 11:36 AM | PERMALINK

"Who does he think he's kidding?" !!!??

Sheesh, get a grip - this is politics, POLITICS. he's politicking, i.e., lying and making stuff up, SOP for a politician. for instance, we've just heard three straight days of hot air coming out of the confirmation hearings -- who do they think they're kidding???

it's p.o.l.i.t.i.c.s.

Posted by: jerry on January 13, 2006 at 11:43 AM | PERMALINK

Shorter John Boehner (is that pronounced boner?):

The K Street Project is now called the M Street Project. Mission accomplished.

Posted by: MeLoseBrain? on January 13, 2006 at 12:13 PM | PERMALINK


contentious: That's why Republicans want to keep tax rates low. They don't trust themselves with "your" money.

The White House deputy budget director, predicted that the government's shortfall would climb to more than $400 billion in 2006 from $319 billion in 2005.

Since President Bush took office in 2001, the federal budget has swung from a surplus of more than $100 billion to deficits as high as $412 billion in 2004. (THAT ONE WAS A RECORD AS WAS THE ONE BEFORE IT)

As a percentage of gross domestic product, government spending has climbed sharply, from 18.5 percent in 2001 to nearly 20 percent for each of the past three years.

bush's promise to "cut" budget deficits to only...

250-billion....

is like a drunk promising....he'll only drink half the bottle

Posted by: thisspaceavailable on January 13, 2006 at 12:33 PM | PERMALINK

Cheney/Charlie/Chuckles:

I never spammed the Howard Dean thread, but I did post in direct response to someone's challenge to prove Bush never said "imminent threat" - I doubt me posting here 1/2 hour per year is going to kill anyone (unlike the number of abortions in the past 1/2 hour).

You spammed the thread. The vast majority of those posts which bear your handle on the thread were transcripts from the White House archives of speeches given by the President. When asked to stop Spamming, you continued. You even boasted about it, and made threats later in the week to continue doing that to close debate.

HOWARD DEAN'S TRACK RECORD....Kevin Drum 12:42 PM Permalink | TrackBack (0) | Comments (753)

Here is the Permalink:
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2005_12/007726.php

Posted by: Pale Rider on January 13, 2006 at 2:12 PM | PERMALINK

Isn't the definition of "spam" posting the same off-topic post in different threads - using that definition, then, who exactly is spamming?

From wikipedia, you boob:

Forum spam

Spamming an internet forum is when a user posts something which is off-topic or doesnt have anything to do with the current subject. Also, a post that doesnt contribute to the thread whatsoever is also considered spam in some cases. A third form of Forum Spamming is where a person repeatedly posts about a certain subject in a manner that is unwanted by (and possibly annoying to) the general population of the forum.


Posted by: trex on January 13, 2006 at 5:20 PM | PERMALINK

lib wrote:

"Next you will be telling me that George Bush has a Ph. D. in Philology."

Posted by: lib on January 12, 2006 at 7:31 PM | PERMALINK


Nope. He has a Masters in Business (MBA) from Harvard. [ What *were* they thinking? ] But, I don't think that's where he learned that deficits don't matter. There's that ID thing, Intelligence Deficit. It hasn't stopped him at all. His Poppy has always made sure he had a little help from the right friends to always succeed.

BTW, his major at Yale was History. Not that you'd notice or anything.

Posted by: MarkH on January 13, 2006 at 7:39 PM | PERMALINK

berlins wrote:

"Your whinning about some hard ball politics. You think that Democrats don't do the same things."

Posted by: berlins on January 12, 2006 at 11:22 PM | PERMALINK


What do you mean by "the same things"?

Does it include taking indian tribal monies and diverting part to Israelis settling on the West Bank and diverting other parts to Republican campaigns?

Posted by: MarkH on January 13, 2006 at 7:51 PM | PERMALINK

map
map
map
map
map
map
map
map
map
map
map
map
map
map
map
map
map
map
map
map
map
map
map

Posted by: fdfd on January 14, 2006 at 2:15 PM | PERMALINK




 

 

Read Jonathan Rowe remembrance and articles
Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

Advertise in WM



buy from Amazon and
support the Monthly