Scott Rosenberg's Links & Comment

News of Salon, Salon blogs, and the world
Last updated:
5/2/2006; 8:50:09 AM


April 2006
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
            1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30            
Mar   May


Salon Blogs:
 


Subscribe to this blog in Radio:
Subscribe to "Scott Rosenberg's Links & Comment" in Radio UserLand.

Click to see the XML version of this web page.

E-mail this blog's author, Scott Rosenberg:
Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.
 

Monday, April 03, 2006 PERMALINK

A brief moment of silence, please, for the political career of Tom DeLay. The Hammer has fallen. He's leaving Congress and abandoning his re-election bid. Time has the story.

DeLay makes the usual noises about how he's doing it for the good of his party. Time says: "He decided last Wednesday, after months of prayer and contemplation, to spare his suburban Houston district the mudfest to come."

Oh, come on. Tom DeLay has never been one to shun a mudfest. He lives for the mudfest. Le mudfest, c'est DeLay.

We're not supposed to pay any attention to those investigations behind the curtains -- the ones connected with Jack Abramoff, in which two of DeLay's key aides have already pleaded guilty to corruption charges. No, they don't have anything to do with this move. "It had nothing to do with any criminal investigation," DeLay's lawyer told the Times.

Right. Sure. If you believe that, you perhaps also believe that the mid-decade Texas redistricting plan DeLay rammed through was intended to make sure every Texan's vote counted -- rather than to grab a half-dozen seats for the Republican party. If you believe that, maybe you believe that DeLay -- the man who singlemindedly transformed the last president's tawdry lies about adultery into an impeachment war -- is an easygoing innocent.

No, I think it will become obvious soon enough that this is the act of a cornered man. As Josh Marshall writes: "DeLay's lawyers must have sat him down over the last 72 hours and explained to him that he needs to focus on not spending most of the rest of his life in prison."

The Time piece, which gives DeLay plenty of space to defend himself, deny wrongdoing, and talk of his profound love for God and golf, says the former House majority leader will rededicate himself to his conservative causes: "He said he feels 'liberated' and vowed to pursue an aggressive speaking and organizing campaign aimed at promoting foster care, Republican candidates and a closer connection between religion and government."

Well, we'll see how many Republican candidates want to share a podium with him. The GOP leadership may feel glad to have one fewer albatross around the party's neck. But something tells me this isn't the last DeLay headline we'll see in the months between now and the fall elections. It may not be so easy to forget the Hammer amid the sound of falling gavels.

DeLay specialized in party discipline, the harvesting of lobbyist money, and creative innovation in the realm of political-machine funding. As I wrote a month ago, DeLay is no garden-variety bribe-taker (like that clown Duke Cunningham); he is clearly a new wave, Enron-style crook -- the Andy Fastow of the Republican Party. The K Street Project he spearheaded set out to make sure that lobbyists, formerly understood to have a need for bipartisanship, directed their largesse strictly in the GOP direction. And his dream, seemingly delivered on by the grotesque Texas gerrymander, was to use the money and power he accumulated to cement a permanent Republican majority.

The only fitting epitaph for his political career will be for the American electorate to deliver a landslide rejection of that vision in November. But even if that doesn't happen, even if we're still stuck with a Republican House and Senate, at least Tom DeLay won't be hanging around the Capitol to sanctimoniously gloat.
comment [] 10:00:50 PM | permalink


I was amazed recently to find a Wall Street Journal editorial agreeing with me -- in this case, suggesting that it might be time for the government to give up its ill-fated defense of the Child Online Protection Act, which the ACLU has been fighting for nearly eight years now (Salon is one of a group of publishers that are plaintiffs represented by the ACLU).

I was surprised, really, because in the past the Journal has, let's just say, been less than sympathetic to the cause. This editorial from 2004, for instance, viewed the online free speech argument as an object of contempt ("Larry Flynt...pretending he's Thomas Paine"). What upset the Journal there was the prospect that the Supreme Court might end up more protective of adults' right to free expression online, even on sexual topics, than of the rights of wealthy people to contribute unlimited sums to political campaigns.

That should have tipped me off to what might have swung the Journal over to the ACLU's side in the COPA matter. It turns out that the Journal's indifference to the Right to Free Speech is outweighed by its horror at the prospect of government interference with the Right to Do Business.

Specifically, when the government's effort to save COPA spilled over into what the Journal rightly called a "fishing expedition" into Google's log files, sparking a headline frenzy, the paper's editorialists had enough: "If commandeering such data from private companies against their will is what it takes to defend the law," the Journal wrote, "maybe defending it isn't worth the effort."

Indeed. Welcome to the team, WSJers! Next, can we interest you in some ACLU membership cards?
comment [] 4:22:15 PM | permalink




© Copyright 2006 Scott Rosenberg. Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.
Last update: 5/2/2006; 8:50:09 AM.
Powered by