Sunday, January 08, 2006

Newsweek's Isikoff Likes His Kool-Aid

Newsweek's Michael Isikoff has posted an article on how the Abramoff scandal will impact Washington. While he provided a decent rundown of the scandal, he really didn't inform us of anything new. I found myself nodding along thinking that Mikey had turned away from the Kool-Aid and was tired of his WhiteHouse steno gig until I see this:

But the public is likely to remain appropriately skeptical of both parties. According to a Gallup poll taken last month, some 49 percent believe "most members" are corrupt and are about evenly divided over who is more corrupt, Republicans or Democrats.

Please, Mikey, please! I know there are some Democrats who have made me less-than proud at times, but I have yet to hear that one has been indicted or even targeted with an investigation recently. What do you mean that Americans are appropriately skeptical of both parties? Which Democrat has given you cause for skepticism? Can you please give us specifics? Oh, and I want recent specifics, not something that happened ten years ago.

I really am trying to find a reason to read Newsweek. So far, I think reading it online for free will have to do because I'm simply not paying good money for that crap.

The article was also written by Holly Bailey and Evan Thomas.


Blogger Gentleman Brown said...

Here's some names that you can Google;
Robert “The Torch” Torricelli
Jim Traficant
The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee & the Steele's credit report
Gary Condit

That's just off the top of my head without picking the easy stuff from the Clinton years. I'm sure you can find more.

3:21 PM EST  
Blogger B. Muse said...

I'm trying to work with current issues instead of historical ones. I'm also trying to concentrate on the Abramoff scandal for now and as soon as they investigate or indict a Democrat I will certainly write about it. I have written about Dems caught in scandals on my local NC blog. You can check it out at

8:56 PM EST  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey poster going by the name of "anonymous coward":

What part of "recently" don't you get?

What does a "Credit Report" have to do with this? An action by a staffer (and no I don't believe one word from "Michelle Malkin" ever since she was proven a liar by saying she wrote all her own blogs) isn't the same as taking BRIBES FROM ABRAMHOFF!

You say Gary Condit, I say Joe Scarbough. What's the difference in 2 dead Interns by FORMER MEMBERS?

But the answer to all this rests in the fact that no one you name is an ACTIVE Democrat in congress!

That is unlike:

Randy "Duke" Cunningham
Pompass Pompo?

And all the other Rethugs who will be caught up in Abramhoff's dirty money. Then there's other scandals that are only being whispered about (like Hurwitz). Add to that the coming indictment of Karl Rove, plus Lewis Libby's and David Savabian's trialS and you have a change in CONgressional control. Expect Repugs to be turned out in big numbers as the Rethug "Culture of Corruption" does not include any Democrats who are ACTIVE MEMBERS OF CONGRESS!

By February of 07, you will see the Administration's members appearing before Televised hearings in response to Subpoena's. By March of 07, look for IMPEACHMENT if both the House and Senate change hands. Six months ago, I couldn't envision a change in control. With each passing scandal (i.e. Katrina and Domestic Spying) the likehood of that increases--despite GOP shills like Isakoff or apologists like you!

Ron Russell

3:16 AM EST  

Post a Comment

<< Home