FRANK RICH: Is Abramoff the New Monica?

[kpete]

Is Abramoff the New Monica?

By FRANK RICH
Published: January 15, 2006

THERE'S nothing this White House loves more than pictures that tell a story - a fictional story. And so another mission was accomplished when President Bush posed with the 13 past secretaries of state and defense he hustled into the Oval Office 10 days ago: he could pretend to consult on Iraq with sages of all political stripes - Madeleine Albright, yet - even if the actual give-and-take, all 5 to 10 minutes of it, was as substantive as the scripted "Ask the President" town hall meetings of the 2004 campaign.

But this White House, cunning as it is, can't control all the pictures all the time. That photo op was quickly followed by Time's Jack Abramoff cover and its specter of other images more inopportune than op. Mr. Bush's aides, the magazine reported, were busy "trying to identify all the photos that may exist of the two men together." Translation: Could a Bush-Abramoff money shot as iconic as Monica on the rope line be lurking somewhere for a Time cover still to come?

This much is certain: 1) The Abramoff scandal, so far anyway, boasts plenty of cigars but no sex. 2) It has almost everything else, including the "Miami Vice"-style rub-out of a Florida casino-cruise-ship mogul who'd had contentious business dealings with Mr. Abramoff. Not without reason is the White House on a frantic search-and-destroy mission to root out any potential embarrassments. Mr. Bush's expert stage managers are smart enough to know that this scandal may metastasize from a cancer on Congress to a cancer on the Republican Party in general and this presidency in particular.

http://select.nytimes.com/2006/01/15/opinion/15rich.html?pagewanted=1&hp

[GreenPartyVoter]

1. Heehee! I love it!

[Nomen Tuum]

2. No, since the New York Times is still so biased toward Bush

The same liars at the Screw York Times who demanded Clinton's impeachment STILL give Bush pass after pass.

Don't get me started with the other liars at the Chicago Fibune, Lies Angeles Times, Atlanta KKKonstitution or Whoreshington Post...

[robbedvoter]

4. Frank Rich is a columnist . He's not NYT

It's a bit simplistic to reject the good stuff that gets published there (Krugman, Rich & a few others) because of the editorial policy of the NYT....I have my problems with Rich, but will read his columns that these days have a lot of truth.

[WilliamPitt]

3. "and this presidency in particular"

Only if we're luckier than we have been. This fucker has beaten 'cancer' more times than John Wayne.

[robbedvoter]

5. Funny how Frank doesn't miss the opportunity to attack Albright

for not being "more substantive" in a 5-10 minutes photo op. But then again, Frank, your incessant attacks on Clinton, Gore's run against W in 2000 helped us all get in the mess we are now. Anyway, his present column reminds me of this:

[Straight Shooter]

6. Abramoff's restaurant, Signatures, asked for suggestions for a new name.

I submitted Monica's Revenge. Heh.

[applegrove]

7. Title makes it sound all so trite. But that is his point. Much

deeper issues about power, Repuke money circles, what should the character be of "insiders". The idea that Senators and Congressmen are so desperate for money that they make great people to push around - not to mention campaign finance - is not funny.

[Indykatie]

9. I Enjoy Rich's Commentaries

and hope like heck that we find lots of pictures withW and Abramoff. Much of the public is not following the Abramoff story but a picture would no doubt get their attention.

[Libby2]

8. The comparison is insulting. n/t

[applegrove]

10. My first reaction too. Then I read the article. Rich is indeed saying just

that. That in the wildest dreams of the GOP they would have Abramoff scandal be weighted the same as Monica.

[American liberal]

12. I can't read the article unless I subscribe to NYTselect...

Have any of you sbuscribed? Is it worth it? I think they're offering 14-day free trial, then $3/month, or something like that. I am reluctant because I'm sure the fee is set low for now and will become comparable to the paper as more people catch on.

[American liberal]

11. "the comparison is insulting" was my first reaction as well

Comparing Clinton's indiscretion with a starry-eyed intern to a lobbyist who has been implicated in stealing MILLIONS from Native Americans, among other ILLEGAL Repub. financing schemes, does not sit well at all. I read if he hadn't pleaded out, Abramoff was facing a 100-year sentence in federal prison for his "indiscretions." No comparison, IMHO... :mad:

OK, now I'll go read the article. hehehe