Democrats Doubletalk Does Nothing to Change Perception of Politicians

Once again the Democrats are shooting themselves in the foot in the court of public opinion. As the Abramoff scandal gains momentum and everyone in D.C. is running for cover, the Democrats are screwing up a gigantic opportunity to define themselves as the party of the people while at the same time giving the GOP a much needed out.

It has been made perfectly clear to anyone watching politics since the beginning of the 2000 presidential campaign that the American public does not understand the subtleties involved in the politcal arena, nor does it want to. So the Democrat's argument that they don't have to give back money donated by Abramoff clients simply because it did not come directly from Abramoff himself doesn't hold a lot of water with the average citizen. This money, be it from Abramoff or one of his clients, is dirty money, plain and simple.

The number one reason that many people cite when explaining their lack of participation in the political process is that "all politicians are the same." The Democrats refusal to return these funds only furthers this view of politicians. In fact, in light of all the noise the Democratic leadership is making, accusing the Republicans of fostering a "culture of corruption," this refusal will only allow the GOP to score points with an already brainwashed base.

The NRSC (National Republican Senatorial Committee) has already begun its push to tar the Democrats with the Abramoff brush by releasing a list of Democratic senators who have received "Abramoff-related money." Howard Dean's protests that none of that money came directly from Abramoff but instead came from Abramoff clients means nothing to the average voter for two reasons:

(1) Anyone who is either (a) a Republican apologist or (b) a conservative leaning independent has already been conditioned (and I mean that in the purest Pavlovian dog-drooling way) to discount anything that comes out of Howard Dean's mouth. And. . .

(2) The fine distinction that it never came from Jack Abramoff is a little too fine for my taste and every other regular American who has come to realize that there are no coincidences in politics where cover-your-ass is standard operating procedure.

The simple fact is that this money is dirty, whether or not it really is accordingto the law or semantics. Even more disturbing is the piddly amounts these politicians are refusing to give back, most of which are less than $10,000. There are a few whoppers, such as the nearly $69,000 to Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, (who refuses to give it back) and over $79,000 to Senator Byron Dorgan, (who has returned it,) but all in all it would not be a hardship for these senators and representives to give these funds up. The resulting good press and the ability to take the high ground on this issue would more than make up for the loss of the money.

In Addition:

I must however point out the hypocrisy of the right-wing bloggers on one point regarding this issue. One blogger pointed out that although Senator Dorgan returned his money, he is still involved in the investigation being conducted by the Senate Indian Affairs committee, of which he is a member, suggesting a conflict of interest. This statement is just the tiniest bit laughable in light of the hobby the GOP makes of ignoring conflicts of interest. Allow me to remind everyone of just a few:

Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist's voting record on health care issues while still maintaining control of a large block of stock in HCA, a health care company that owns a number of hospitals and a health insurance company. According to The Knoxville Tennessean, Frist voted on a number of bills that directly related to HCA business including a bill that limited jury awards to plaintiffs who sued their HMOs and a bill that "curbed development of physician-owned specialty hospitals that compete with HCA." (Pack, Todd, "Frist votes aid HCA's business interests.", The Knoxville Tennessean, 04 Dec. 2005)

Vice President Dick Cheney's ties to Halliburton and their uncanny ability to land no-bid contract after no-bid contract and their equally amazing ability to avoid fines, penalties and criminal charges when both Pentagon and GAO audits clearly show that the company did not provide the services they were paid for. I could go on about this topic for days, but for more info just find yourself a lazy afternoon and type Cheney and Halliburton into the old Google and have fun. If you become too outraged go to WhiteHouse.org for a good laugh.

Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito, who despite promises to the contrary, did not recuse himself from a court case involving the Vanguard mutual fund company. Alito ruled in favor of the company while at the same time owning more than $390,000 in Vanguard funds. For more info, read "Plaintiff alleges Alito conflict" in the Boston Globe.