Mirror, Mirror, on the wall, who is the most corrupt of them all

Was there ever really any doubt that Jack Abramoff was a badguy? check out this picture of him Come on; black trenchcoat, black tophat, plump from the comforts of power and money; how could anyone have associated with this guy and then claim they had no idea or weren't influenced by him?

MSNBC has an article up today about how the midterm election in '94 is scarily similar to the political situation the republicans are running into now. in 1994, the democrats had sole control of the government, with majorities in both the house and senate. They had control of both legislative branches for an extended period, had basically neutralized the republican's ability to even participate in governing, and were struck down with corruption and finance scandal. This is when Newt Gingrich and Tom DeLay, among others, spearheaded a grassroots-style campaign to retake Washington based on their "Contract With America", a 10-point plan to shrink the government, hold politicians responsible, excise corruption caused by the democrats who had been in power way too long, balance the budget, and reduce the deficit. And it worked; they gained an amazing 50 seats in the house, and enough to take the senate as well, and proceeded to make good on their campaign promises in equally impressive fashion.

My, how the mighty have fallen

April, 2006: Tom DeLay, the most powerful congressman in Washington, removes his name from the re-election plans of the GOP amid two of his senior aids committing to a plea bargain in relation to the massive corruption and money-laundering scandel revolving around him. Duke Cunningham, another high-ranking republican representative, resigned last year after pleading guilty in his own corruption scandal. And now, republican senator Conrad Burns is facing down his own demons; he recieved more money from Abramoff than any other government official, and has seen his lead over his democratic opponent in his re-election bid drop from 15 points to just 6, and NOW he is facing down another republican candidate as well; Bob Keenan, former State Senate leader, is also planning on running after being fed-up with Burns and his representation of the state and the shame he has brought.

1994: 3 top democrats step down amid corruption scandals, and the democrats lose both the house and senate to reform-minded republicans.

2006: 2 top republicans step down amid corruption scandals, with midterm elections only months away.

The big difference here is president Clinton vs. president bush. Clinton was semi-successful, reducing the federal deficit and proposing a healthcare plan that would have been a great boon to the American people. bush, on the other hand, has sent us to war under false pretenses, absolutely failed the people of New Orleans after hurricane Katrina, and violated our civil rights and condoned torture with no remorse or signs of stopping.

And Clinton's democrats STILL managed to lose control of congress. Does this bode well for bush's republicans? Let's ask Newt Gingrich, master engineer of the grassroot republican effort in taking back congress from the corrupt democrats.


"(Republicans) are seen by the country as being in charge of a government that can't function," he said. "We could lose control this fall." He states on his website, newt.org.
He cited a series of blunders under Republican rule, from failures in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina to mismanagement of the war in Iraq. He said the immigration bill passed by his former colleagues in the House of Representatives is unrealistic and too harsh toward undocumented immigrants, called congressional efforts to regulate lobbying "much too weak" and said the government has squandered billions of dollars in Iraq. Gingrich said Republicans have grown too comfortable in power and lost the grass-roots, outside-the-Beltway attitude that once fed their hunger to downsize the government.

The guy is right on every account. What I find most interesting, though, are his thoughts on the immigration issue, considering the massive protests occurring right now. I was in LA this spring break and saw the 500,000 man-march through the city. Today, over 100,000 are marching in Texas, with 5 more protests planned for later today. What does Newt say about the prospect of a corrupt, ineffective congress solving this issue?

"I have no faith that the (current) United States government can run a temporary-worker program without having so much corruption and bureaucracy and red tape that it will rapidly collapse of its own weight,'' he said. ``... This is a bureaucracy which in 2004 did not fine a single American business for hiring 11 million people illegally.''

That guy just sees to the heart of the issues. republicans gained power based on campaign promises of reducing the government, spending, deficit, and corruption. Now look what has happened; they are engulfed in those same issues.

Here's a Thought... Would anyone really be suprised if the republicans lost both congressional houses? The phrase "History repeats itself" has been proven true time and time again, and history has proven that corrupt congresses do not last against focused opposition. democrats began their campaign bids months ago with their Rubber Stamp stunts and Feingold and Murta's strong stands against the president himself. The corruption scandal, leak trial of Scooter Libby, and immigration bill failures so far are threatening to consume their very party in flames of obscurity, treason, and malfeasance, and cause the largest political shake-up that the country has seen in over a decade. And considering the route our country has been travelling down, is there any doubt that would be a good thing?