Thursday, January 5, 2006

Cage Match

Two opposing views of the Abramoff situation from two conservative pundits.

  • David Brooks at the New York Times beats the crap out of the Republicans for covering for Jack Abramoff:

    I don’t know what’s more pathetic, Jack Abramoff’s sleaze or Republican paralysis in the face of it. Abramoff walks out of a D.C. courthouse in his pseudo-Hasidic homburg, and all that leading Republicans can do is promise to return his money and remind everyone that some Democrats are involved in the scandal, too.

    That’s a great G.O.P. talking point: some Democrats are so sleazy, they get involved with the likes of us.


    Back in the dim recesses of my mind, I remember a party that thought of itself as a reform, or even a revolutionary movement. That party used to be known as the Republican Party. I wonder if it still exists.

  • Meanwhile, Jonah Goldberg at NRO’s The Corner thinks it’s no big deal.

    As it stands now, it’s your basic K-Street corruption story. I was never that interested in these kinds of stories under Clinton — when they were more plentiful — and I’m not now. Until then, my attitude is shame on the guilty parties and get back to me when there’s something interesting to discuss.

    I think Mr. Brooks is probably right, but most of the tweeters will probably follow Mr. Goldberg’s lead and ignore it until it’s too late. Fine with me.