The Shortcut
Kinsley ... spot on. That's about all that need be said. Well, that and "Read the whole thing." Not much of a point to elaborate much on the Duke Cunningham moment of political corruption. You know it speaks volumes when even Tom DeLay goes from saying what a great person Duke is last summer to not even recognizing the name today.
Kinsley's peg in this column is that the GOP seems to have just skipped a few steps along the way in arriving at "corruption" as their final destination. What took Democrats in Congress 40 years to begin to scratch at just took the GOP 10 to outdo us in so many regards, it'd make your head spin. Unless, of course, you're a Republican blogger hellbent on defending this bunch.
Granted, some have fallen for the GOP angle hook line and sinker. Just goes to show you how entirely correct Michael Scanlon was about how our friends on the right get their information.
SIDENOTE: And since I'm sensing an impending comment deletion from Houston's oh-so-above-it-all blogger on the right, here's the copy of my comment to Kev's post trying to implicate two Democratic Senators in the Jack Abramoff scandal:
Congratulations ... you've been spun, Kev.http://mediamatters.org/items/200511300016
I guess that makes your clarified point rather self-validating. I mean, as much as you might like to portray yourself as "above" being on "a side," is anyone really buying it? You've made the point on Tom's blog about how we shouldn't forget the sentiments of the local newsrag's executive editor's views on matters that are reported by the news department with regard to the death penalty. Should you be treated any differently? Am I to neglect the years of Republican apologetics you've engaged in when you make a point of trying to appear above it all as you do now? Just looking for some clarity on this double-standard.
The post over at Tom's blog (with a rather bold opinion on Tom's part, IMHO) is here.
UPDATE 2.0 WOW! How right I was! The Kevster has once more discovered the delete button in order to deal with his own intellectual inconsistencies.