January 29
The entry Monday about Richard Scrushy buying pastoral support for his defense in his accounting fraud trial leads to a related point I didn't have time for then, nor have I been healthy enough to blog since then (an advantage of a figurative over a literal soapbox is you can't catch my infectious diseases). It gets to that phrase Republicans are coming to hate, "culture of corruption" (what, they'd prefer "kleptocracy"?). Corporate accounting fraud has nothing to do with Jack Abramoff, or lobbying scandals, or Congress, or Bush, but is part of it. Scrushy went from corporate CEO under indictment to TV evangelist in Alabama. He couldn't have been more Republican if had elephant jammies. Ken Lay was the acting president's political sugar daddy, and the sharing of personnel between the upper ranks of Enron and the upper ranks of the Bush administration was looking pretty embarrassing until Bush contrived a crisis in Iraq just in time for the 2002 election. Just yesterday, Bloomberg carried this story that another scandal corporation, Tyco, hired as a lobbyist guess who, Abramoff. David Safavian, now under indictment, tipped off Abramoff who tipped off Tyco that they were about to lose eligibility for federal contracts.
As much Republicans understandably wish this culture of corruption was non-partisan, wouldn't it be worse if it was? Think about it: corruption already permeates Congress, the executive branch, we're about to see the approval of a Supreme Court nominee who doesn't recuse himself when he has a financial interest in the outcome of a case; staff jobs are just rungs on the ladder to the more important lobbying jobs; corruption in terms of accounting scandals has been cracked down upon, but executives move in and out of government with the effect industries get to regulate themselves; besides Scrushy's cynical use of religion, many churches act like local party HQ for the GOP while the IRS looks the other way, and lobbyists like Abramoff and Ralph Reed not only manipulate religion for grassroots campaigns, they plead their piety when they get caught; when you look to the media for coverage of what's going on, you discover much positive coverage of these corrupt people was paid for while the recipients of the pay didn't disclose the extra pay they got from the people they praised. Yes, it does seem like the corruption is spreading to every institution, and such a circumstance would have to make us fearful of what's happened to this country except for one common factor in all of it: it's all Republicans/conservatives who are doing it. The upper reaches of corporate America are heavily Republican, the federal government is entirely under Republican control, the corruption of religion is coming from the conservative side, the journalists/columnists who are getting caught on the take have all been conservatives, and even the state governments ridden with scandal have been Republican.
It all goes to show just how much is at stake in the next election. Americans blew their chance in the last election to clean things up, provided you believe the election results. Even if you believe as I do that the Republicans have been stealing elections, the votes were at least close, and crooks have been genuinely winning. The fact the Tom DeLay got elected should tell us there is a long way to go in exposing the corruption to more of the voters. Much of it is still an impression to many and not yet associated with the GOP. I think we're making progress in getting the word out beyond bloggers and news junkies but we're far from being able to stop.The entry Monday about Richard Scrushy buying pastoral support for his defense in his accounting fraud trial leads to a related point I didn't have time for then, nor have I been healthy enough to blog since then (an advantage of a figurative over a literal soapbox is you can't catch my infectious diseases). It gets to that phrase Republicans are coming to hate, "culture of corruption" (what, they'd prefer "kleptocracy"?). Corporate accounting fraud has nothing to do with Jack Abramoff, or lobbying scandals, or Congress, or Bush, but is part of it. Scrushy went from corporate CEO under indictment to TV evangelist in Alabama. He couldn't have been more Republican if had elephant jammies. Ken Lay was the acting president's political sugar daddy, and the sharing of personnel between the upper ranks of Enron and the upper ranks of the Bush administration was looking pretty embarrassing until Bush contrived a crisis in Iraq just in time for the 2002 election. Just yesterday, Bloomberg carried this story that another scandal corporation, Tyco, hired as a lobbyist guess who, Abramoff. David Safavian, now under indictment, tipped off Abramoff who tipped off Tyco that they were about to lose eligibility for federal contracts.
As much Republicans understandably wish this culture of corruption was non-partisan, wouldn't it be worse if it was? Think about it: corruption already permeates Congress, the executive branch, we're about to see the approval of a Supreme Court nominee who doesn't recuse himself when he has a financial interest in the outcome of a case; staff jobs are just rungs on the ladder to the more important lobbying jobs; corruption in terms of accounting scandals has been cracked down upon, but executives move in and out of government with the effect industries get to regulate themselves; besides Scrushy's cynical use of religion, many churches act like local party HQ for the GOP while the IRS looks the other way, and lobbyists like Abramoff and Ralph Reed not only manipulate religion for grassroots campaigns, they plead their piety when they get caught; when you look to the media for coverage of what's going on, you discover much positive coverage of these corrupt people was paid for while the recipients of the pay didn't disclose the extra pay they got from the people they praised. Yes, it does seem like the corruption is spreading to every institution, and such a circumstance would have to make us fearful of what's happened to this country except for one common factor in all of it: it's all Republicans/conservatives who are doing it. The upper reaches of corporate America are heavily Republican, the federal government is entirely under Republican control, the corruption of religion is coming from the conservative side, the journalists/columnists who are getting caught on the take have all been conservatives, and even the state governments ridden with scandal have been Republican.
It all goes to show just how much is at stake in the next election. Americans blew their chance in the last election to clean things up, provided you believe the election results. Even if you believe as I do that the Republicans have been stealing elections, the votes were at least close, and crooks have been genuinely winning. The fact the Tom DeLay got elected should tell us there is a long way to go in exposing the corruption to more of the voters. Much of it is still an impression to many and not yet associated with the GOP. I think we're making progress in getting the word out beyond bloggers and news junkies but we're far from being able to stop.
January 23
This "Take the Red Pill Award" goes to the jurors who acquitted Richard Scrushy last June. Scrushy is the former CEO of HealthSouth Corp. and allegedly behind one of the biggest instances of accounting fraud to come out during the spate of scandals in 2001-2002. The verdict was a surprise at the time, the successful defense including religious appeals. Now, it turns out Scrushy paid for the black pastors who oddly sat in on the trial to lend their presence to the argument that Scrushy was a good Christian man. At least one was also planted stories favorable stories in The Birmingham Times. Scrushy himself has turned TV evangelist. Well, it worked. The jury bought the story that this was he was really a good Christian. Surely he couldn't be the corrupt man portrayed by the prosecution and everybody who worked with him --- except it now looks like he purchased the good impression with a little of the money he stole. In hopes that they will learn that publicly praying to Jesus does not a decent man make, those who aqquitted this religious man get a "Take the Red Pill Award."
January 22
I don't know what you or I can do about it necessarily, perhaps get our policy makers, if they'll consider a major factor in deciding Iraq policy which their record indicates they haven't given a thought. Maybe this is just documentation for me when I say "I told you so". Anyway, it appears that the biggest obstacle to a unified Iraq won't be the religious divide between Sunni and Shiite Muslims, but the separatist aspirations of the Kurds. This is hardly a new thought to us news junkies, but I really hope the acting president and the people inside the bubble have that thought, and I doubt that they do. With that downer of an opening, let me state that alas it's not my own original thought. Oddly enough, that idea comes from journalists who have actually been to the Kurdish regions of Iraq and spoken to real Kurds rather than soaking up the drivel from administration spokesman.
Frank Viviano wrote The Kurds in Control in this month's National Geographic. The key point is that there are plenty of divisions among Kurds, but they are quite agreed in their desire for independence. There is a very similar article in last month's Smithsonian, where Andrew Cockburn noted the same things, that there is a divisions between two powerful militias/political parties which have fought each other, but the Kurds are unified in hating Arabs and wanting independence. Knight Ridder ran this article by a reporter, Tom Lasseter, who spent time with Kurdish soldiers in the Iraqi army. These soldiers were upfront about their loyalty to their Kurdish militia leaders before anyone in the Iraqi army, and that includes turning on the Arabs in the army if taking Kirkuk comes down to force. Be in no doubt that Kirkuk is the flashpoint, the place more than one side think they have to have. The Iraqi army denied the Knight Ridder report was accurate, but demanded the names of those who talked.
A common theme is the Kurds know they will have no outside help when they make their bid for independence, but they are preparing slowly. They are building their own economy, separate political structures, making their own deals with foreign businesses, and above all maintaining their own armies. I hope Smithsonian will forgive the copyright infringement as the accompanying map is from their article, but it shows the biggest complication in the whole situation. Maybe they'll consider the link adequate compensation. Anyway, please notice that the Kurds have a contiguous territory divided among four nations. The Iraqi Kurds hate the Arabs for the oppression suffered not just under Saddam but before him too. Turkey has had a long war with its Kurds and threatens to invade Iraq if the Iraqi Kurds declare independence. Personally, I think they mean it. The Kurds have had less documented problems with Iran, and I suspect Iran might intervene to suppress restiveness among its Kurds. I don't know how Syria's Kurds get along, but combine potential separationism with the US neocons fantasy that the war in Iraq is due to arms coming from Syria, and I can imagine potential trouble.
OK, there's not an obvious action item here. You can't just send off a letter to your Congressman demanding this allegation be investigated, or this alleged crime be prosecuted, or this bill be passed or opposed. If I can ask one thing of those in power, it is that they stop and think through this complex situation which could change in ways I suspect they have not considered.




