From Our Fear Monger-In-Chief

You don't see much of the vice president these days. It used to be a joke that VP's were only visible at funerals and conventions - kept in the background. Some were actually political opponents within the party, like Lyndon Johnson. The job disarmed them, so to speak.

But Cheney came to the Bush administration fully armed and seemingly obsessed with a long-brewed neocon scheme to conquer Iraq and install an oil-rich democracy in the Mideast. To that end, he has twisted the truth and blatantly lied many times to the media - it seems to be his function in this administration. And yet nobody seems willing or able to hold him accountable for pushing blatant propaganda on the American public. The following are snips from various interviews with Tim Russert on NBC's Meet the Press.

It's now public that, in fact, [Saddam] has been seeking to acquire... the kinds of tubes that are necessary to build a centrifuge. And the centrifuge is required to take low-grade uranium and enhance it into highly enriched uranium, which is what you have to have in order to build a bomb. [9/8/02]

"We do know, with absolute certainty, that [Saddam] is using his procurement system to acquire the equipment he needs in order to enrich uranium to build a nuclear weapon." [9/8/02]

"Well, I think I've just given it, Tim, in terms of the combination of his development and use of chemical weapons, his development of biological weapons, his pursuit of nuclear weapons... It's only a matter of time until he acquires nuclear weapons." [3/14/03]

"We know that he has a long-standing relationship with various terrorist groups, including the al-Qaeda organization." [3/14/03]

"We learned more and more that there was a relationship between Iraq and al-Qaeda." [9/23/03]

None of the above statements were true, and he knew full well at the time. No wonder he stays in his bunker.

Impeachment and the State of the Union

Nobody I know is seriously considering the impeachment of our stealth president, Dick Cheney, and his sidekick George Bush. But like a lot of people, I've read the list of possible offenses, and they seem pretty valid, especially when considering the human carnage and suffering they have exacerbated - and I also remember vividly the Clinton impeachment with all its sordid drama and moral outrage. It was an embarrassment. A Bush/Cheney impeachment would be incredibly ugly. I'm wondering if the American people have the stomach to expose the world to the inner workings of their crooked, corporatized executive branch.

As Gore Vidal says in his essay, President Jonah, "Not since the glory days of Watergate and Nixon's Luciferian fall has there been so much written about the dogged deceits and creative criminalities of our rulers."

I ran across this article from The Texas Observer by Ronnie Dugger, and it's better than anything I could write on the subject of a possible Bush/Cheney indictment or impeachment. He touches on crucial questions about America - the values of its leaders and the people who elected them. I think there's a little embarrassment down in Texas - that they helped grease their favorite son's ascendance to bungling leader the free world. I don't blame them.

This country has taken a path under the Bush/Cheney administration that is a radical departure from life as I knew it growing up here in god's country. Our representatives to Congress, for instance, have never been so brazenly connected to big corporations and party fundraising as is Roy Blunt.

"Our elections are bought, and our government is run by and for the major transnational corporations," Dugger writes, and our boy Roy is right there making it happen with a wink and a nod from the Bushies. Everything's cool, the money is rolling in.

On Bush's grab for unconstitutional executive power, Dugger says "Bush announced in 2002 his illegal presidential policy that the United States can and will attack other nations first, waging war on them, when he so decides. He is now waging, as if he were doing it in our names, a bloody war of aggression against Iraq . . ."

And here we are four years later with 2,200 American soldiers dead, 35,000 Iraqi's killed (give or take 5,000), a terrorist group winning election in Palestine, U. S.-run secret prisons overseas, condoned torture by the military, warrantless wiretapping of American citizens, a massive national debt, $250 billion sucked away in Iraq, an emboldened, antagonistic Iran with nuclear capability . . . and let's not even talk about solving our considerable problems here at home with perhaps the most corrupt (and certainly the most corporate) Congress in history.

I remember talking to my neighbor out in the driveway before the 2000 election. We both thought the presidential election would be close, but we figured Gore would win. And he did, but that's another issue entirely.

Remember how people used to say it didn't matter who was president? "Six of one, half dozen of the other." Right. I may be grasping for a silver lining here, but do you think it's possible the disastrous Bush presidency might persuade more people to participate in the choosing of their leaders next November? Are enough people even paying attention? If not, I guess we will continue to get the leadership we deserve.

Do you ever wonder how a Gore administration would have dealt with 9/11?

On Tuesday, George Bush will take the podium and tell us how great things are. Just Pretend It's All Okay. But there's no telling what else is coming down the pike with these guys. I understand Bush is poised to solve the health care crisis in America, and we'll hear all about it Tuesday night. "And now, from the same folks who brought you Homeland Security's Rapid Response Katrina Team, Social Security Reform and the War in Iraq . . ."
Everybody knows this will go nowhere.

Speaking of state of the union addresses, here's a link to Bill Clinton's last State of the Union speech, just a reminder of what life was like before 9/11 - before all the fear-mongering, the lies, the corruption that the Bush/Cheney team and the Republican Congress have brought to the table.

Images of the Dead

Abortion will once again be a huge distraction in coming weeks as legislators wrestle with the parental consent issue - yet another attempt by fundamentalists to strip away by layers the laws that protect the privacy of pregnant women in America. A big anti-abortion rally is scheduled tomorrow in Washington with a plan to march on Congress and the Supreme Court, placards raised high.

The politics of life and death in this country are hard to understand. How the government, political movements and media deal with the images of death reveals an odd juxtapositioning.

Christian fundamentalists, for instance, revel in the bloody images of Christ, but they also use the image of an aborted fetus to bludgeon the public into understanding what they see as the true nature of abortion.

But where is the outrage when sensitized pro-life proponents come across images of Iraqi children whose bodies have been blown apart by bombs? Why are these images considered anti-war propaganda? A dead Iraqi child is just not their issue of choice, I guess.



And how can our government protect the rights of abortion protesters foisting obscene images upon women entering clinics but steadfastly refuse to let photographers capture the pristine image of caskets containing the remains of American soldiers returning from war overseas?

Three takes on Perception Management.

Apathy Paves Way For Blunt

It appears the upcoming House vote for Majority Leader will be a cake walk for our boy Roy. According to the Washington Post, congressmen returning to their districts for the break are finding that nobody much cares about the upcoming leadership vote. This is a big boost for status quo candidate, Roy Blunt, whose own ethical lapses involving Jack Abramoff's lobbying interests and Tom DeLay's tainted PAC money have made him the GOP's poster boy for extra-legal fundraising in Congress.

Blunt's ethical lapses have been neatly air-brushed by the our Gnews-Leader editorialists, but the Washington Post had this to say:

"The lack of grass-roots enthusiasm for broad changes on Capitol Hill may work to the advantage of Rep. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.), several legislators said. By most estimates, he is leading the race to become the next House majority leader -- despite his extensive connections to lobbyists, including some involved in the Abramoff scandal."

Everything I've read indicates that the Abramoff depositions to federal prosecutors will entwine a multitude of prominent Republicans in the legislative and executive sectors, so it seems very unlikely that our boy Roy will emerge from this with his squeaky clean, good Christian image intact. But these revelations are not likely to appear in the media until after the GOP leadership elections (and maybe never in Roy's fan club newsletter, the News-Leader). And even if Blunt is exposed as just another in a long line of corrupt politicians seeking money for special interests, does it really matter to the straight-ticket voters here in God's Country? I doubt it.

Fact is, voters here would more likely turn on Blunt for dumping his wife of 31 years to marry a younger woman than they would for him secretly inserting provisions in leglislation that helps his sweety's tobacco firm. I can just see the sleazy commericials . . . but wait, Roy's a Republican, not a Democrat. As disorganized and feckless as the Democrats are sometimes, they do have enough class and integrity not to stoop to GOP's level of personal smear.

My prediction: if Abramoff information starts leaking to the press in the next couple of weeks and there aren't any big terrorism stories in the news, Roy loses the secret ballot vote, and John Shadegg becomes Majority Leader. If nothing new emerges, Roy leads the chorus for lobbying reform and is home free to replace his mentor Tom DeLay.

"Perception Becomes Reality"

It seems the News-Leader is intent on "Perception Management" when it comes to supporting Roy Blunt in his candidacy for House Majority Leader. Editorial page editor Robert Leger became the official media apologist for Roy Blunt today, pointing out that . . .

"Rep. Roy Blunt's quest to become the House majority leader is a major local story for southwest Missouri. If he is successful, it will assure continued federal support for key Ozarks projects such as highway improvements, university research, water quality protection and Jordan Valley Park."

But isn't obtaining federal support for district projects what any good Congressman would do for his constituency? True, it would be a lot more fun for the local paper to cover a House Majority Leader than another bland party functionary like Gene Taylor, but is Leger really being completely open with his readers when he says . . .

"No evidence has surfaced that Blunt crossed legal lines like DeLay did. He doesn't make a habit of dining or traveling with lobbyists other than his wife. The amount Abramoff donated to Blunt's leadership PAC is relatively minor."

Technically, Blunt probably didn't cross legal lines, and he won't be indicted like DeLay, but his well-documented ethical lapses - his eleventh-hour addition to a Homeland Security bill to benefit big tobacco interests (not to mention his sleeping with a lobbyist working for said interests), his letters sent on behalf of Abramoff clients to protect their gambling interests in Mississippi, his shuffling of PAC monies to help his son's candidacy back home - does anybody really know how much tainted money ended up in ROYB's coffers?

But Leger shrugs off such questions. "For purists," he says, "any liaison with lobbyists is suspect. Perception becomes reality."

Perception has become reality for Roy Blunt. In reality, Blunt actually did do Jack Abramoff's bidding by writing letters to the Department of Interior urging them to limit tribal expansion that would compete with Abramoff's casino clients. In reality, Blunt did try to attach an after-hours rider that would benefit Philip-Morris, the company that employed his girlfriend. And, as far as we can tell, none of this directly benefited Blunt's constituency in the Ozarks.

Of course, Blunt is now calling for lobbying reform, but this seems a little disingenuous given the fact that he was the main GOP connection to K Street during the lobbyist feeding frenzy that has characterized this Republican-controlled Congress. In effect, Blunt is calling for lobbying reform to curb his own questionable behavior. I guess that's admirable.

Despite what the News-Leader would have its readers believe, Roy Blunt isn't the "aw shucks" former social studies teacher who was sent to Washington to inherit the GOP's 7th District seat. He has become nothing more than a very effective full-time fundraiser for the Republican Party - and what's worse, he has chosen to favor a new constituency while he was away. Blunt has represented lobbyists and PAC's more than his own people back here in Southwest Missouri - and that perception-turned-reality is precisely why his once promising bid to become Majority Leader is now in jeopardy.

Fight for Leadership Gets Ugly

Roy Blunt's campaign to permanently replace Tom DeLay as House Majority Leader took a couple of body blows this week from members of his own party. First, a new candidate for the post, John Shadegg (R-AZ) threw his hat in the ring, and many GOP conservatives appear ready to jump on his bandwagon as an alternative to the status quo (Blunt/DeLay).

A second blow to Blunt's ambitions came when a printed timeline depicting a series of Abramoff/Blunt connections began circulating among GOP house members this week. The timeline shows the following:

June 1999 - Abramoff donates $5,000 to ROYB fund.
February 2000 - Abramoff donates an additional $1,500 to ROYB Fund.
March 2000 - Abramoff donates maximum amount to Matt Blunt's campaign for Missouri Secretary of State.
April 2000 - Abramoff's Mariannas Island client donates $3,000 to ROYB fund.
April 2000 - Abramoff client, Juan Franco (Puerto Rico), contributes $3,000 to ROYB fund.
August 2000 - Blunt and DeLay host Republican National Committee events sponsored in part by Abramoff client, the Mississippi Band of Choctaws.
September 2000 - Blunt requests GAO study on tribal recognition issues and simultaneously seeks a six month moratorium on further tribal recognition - protecting existing casinos from further competition.
February 2002 - GAO report on tribal recognition issued.
March 2002 - Blunt writes letter to Department of Interior citing the GAO report and expressed specific concerns about the Jenna Band of Choctaws and their status in Louisiana. The Jenna Band would have been competition for Abramoff's client with tribal recognition approval.
March 2003 - Abramoff contributes to ROYB fund.
May 2003 - Blunt sends letter to Department of Interior Secretary Gale Norton regarding his concerns about Indian gaming and specifically the Jenna Band in Louisiana.
June 2003 - Blunt joins DeLay, House Speaker Hastert and House Majority Whip Cantor in penning another letter to DOI Secretary Norton regarding the opposed Jenna Band casino.

Isn't it nice to know that Roy is up there in Washington representing our interests here in God's Country? Here is a guy who needs virtually no money whatever to retain his permanent 7th District House seat, and he's up there throwing his influence around trying to protect a favorite lobbyist who is concerned about his client losing gambling revenue in Mississippi.

Further, here we are in socially conservative Southwest Missouri, where family values and high moral character are political euphemisms for "Republican" - yet we continue to elect a guy who goes to Washington and totally immerses himself in party fundraising - not that there's anything inherently wrong with that - but it gets to the point where the lobbyists become his primary constituents. And he gets so cozy with some lobbyists - is literally in bed with one Philip-Morris lobbyist - that he dumps his wife of 31 years and subsequently attempts to sneak a provision into the massive Homeland Security bill that would have aided the very tobacco firm that just happens to be represented by the lobbyist who shares his bed.

Where is the outrage here in God's Country?

Don't expect to see any of this on KY3 or the Gnews-Leader either. No, our local media has remained characteristically silent on the disturbing series of revelations regarding our elected representative to Congress. That's not to say there aren't folks in the local media who wouldn't love to run a big expose' on Blunt's ethical lapses. It just ain't happening, given the "walking-on-eggshells" approach local media has with their conservative reader/viewers. It would be like telling a small child that the Easter Bunny was a fraud (oh, for an image of Roy in bunny ears). Maybe the St. Louis and K. C. media will start making some noise about this.

Oh, and here's another little timeline I ran across in the New York Daily News that further implicates our boy-governor in this fundraising shell game.

March 30, 2000 - DeLay's ARMPAC fund donates $50,000 to Blunt's ROYB fund.
April-May 2000 - ROYB fund pays $40,000 to Alexander Strategy Group, which is run by DeLay's former chief of staff. Christine DeLay also works there. (ASG is closing its doors this month due to the Abramoff scandal.)
April 14, 2000 - Abramoff client from Marinna Islands (garment manufacturer fined by the U. S. government for sweatshop practices) contributes $3,000 to ROYB fund.
May 9, 2000 - ROYB fund contributes $1,000 to Cancer Research Foundation by way of political consultant Jim Ellis (indicted with DeLay), who runs ARMPAC.
May 24, 2000 - ARMPAC contributes $100,000 to ROYB fund.
June 15, 2000 - ROYB fund contributes $100,000 to Missouri Republican Party, which in turn eventually donates a total of $160,000 to Matt Blunt's campaign for Missouri Secretary of State.
October/November 2000 - DeLay's ARMPAC fund contributes $50,000 to Missouri Republic Party.
November 2000 - Matt Blunt is elected Missouri Secretary of State.
November/December 2000 - the Missouri Republican Party contributes $50,000 back to ARMPAC.
November 2000 - Abramoff charges Marinna Island client for meetings held with Trevor Blackann, an aide to Roy Blunt.
September 2001 - Abramoff lobbyist for Marinna Island client meets with Blunt staffer John Dutton to discuss strategies in fighting a minimum wage bill. The minimum wage bill never made it into law.

I'm just wondering how much tainted PAC money found its way to our boy-governor's gubernatorial campaign?

Abramoff "Just As Close to Blunt"

While our esteemed 7th District Congressman, Roy Blunt, is trying desperately to downplay his cozy relationship with indicted lobbyist/swindler Jack Abramoff, it appears that the Abramoff stain just won't wash out.

We ran across a November 2002 feel-good piece by John Bresnahan in Washington Business Forward that introduces mover-and-shaker Jack Abramoff as the lobbyist who is taking Washington by storm. The article begins:

"Greenberg Traurig’s Jack Abramoff is the most unlikely establishment Washington lobbyist: he made his bones producing a Dolph Lundgren movie, working with Indian casinos and doing a riverboat gambling deal that turned messy. Now Abramoff has emerged as an insider’s insider, with close ties to top Republicans and a hefty book of business. But even with his ally Tom DeLay poised to become House Majority Leader, Abramoff’s still found time to go into the restaurant business. Don’t bet against him."

The piece is pure fluff, with lines like: "It’s classic Abramoff: He’s a master at making money while pushing his conservative, free-market ideals." But there's an interesting quote near the end of Breshahan's little promotional that flies in the face of Blunt's earnest denials that he and Abramoff were fundraising pals for several years running. In this interview, Abramoff made an effort to downplay his close relationship with Tom DeLay by naming other associates who were dear to his heart and pocketbook.

“The DeLay thing is played up a lot in terms of our relationship. The fact is when I pitch a client, I never mention Tom DeLay. I never say I know Tom DeLay.” Abramoff says he’s just as close to other Republicans, like Reps. Roy Blunt (MO), Christopher Cox (CA), John Doolittle (CA), Phil Crane (IL) and Dana Rohrabacher (CA)."

The Washington Business Forward piece closes with this ironic little bit of smarm . . .

"Beyond the political world, it’s Abramoff himself who’s a bit unheard of, but that won’t last for long." I'll bet Ol' Roy is wishing he'd never heard of the guy.

Washington Post Links to Ozarks Angel

This probably isn't all that newsworthy, but I thought it was pretty cool that the Washington Post online edition printed a lead from the "Blunt, Inc." piece I posted here last night. It was one of several blogs in a "Who's Blogging About This Article" they feature each day.

I watched Matt Blunt trying to deliver a rousing State of the State speech tonight on public television. He did mention his 65% solution for fixing public education, but I don't think it's going to be high on his agenda this session - too much criticism of his little trial balloon last month.

Daddy Roy was on the tube as well during the evening news, trying to persuade folks that he didn't really know Jack Abramoff and that he'd already returned the measly $8,500 he'd received "over a six year period". Gimmee a break, Roy. This is the same Congressman who was on a short list of VIP customers treated to free meals at Abramoff's swank restaurant in D. C. And the "$8,500 over six years" is just laughable - maybe that was all the money that came directly from Abramoff, but this guy was a master at shuffling donations from one PAC or bogus charitable organization to another. My guess is that a careful look at the tortuous money trails these guys put together would reveal considerably more than $8,500 of tainted money resting in ROYB's political coffers. You can bet on one thing - the more air time the Abramoff scandal receives, the less likely it is that Blunt assumes his much-coveted Majority Leader spot.

Blunt, Inc.

Thomas B. Edsall, of the Washington Post, wrote an interesting piece last May on the rapid rise of Roy Blunt and the incredibly vast network of lobbyists and corporate donors that have made him one of the most well-financed representatives on the hill. The story, entitled House Majority Whip Exerts Influence by Way of K Street, outlines how Roy, his new lobbyist wife Abigail and sons Matt and Andrew have benefited greatly since Roy took office as our 7th District Representative in 1997 and began schmoozing around with big money interests.

Blunt's corporate and K Street connections have grown at an uncanny rate over the past eight years - to the point that his own financial holdings through PACs and re-election committees rival, or even surpass those of his mentor, Tom DeLay. In short, Blunt has become the GOP's "key liaison to lobbyists . . . who direct the flow of individual and political action committee contributions from the 1,600 corporations and 1,200 trade associations with PACs." Hence the moniker Blunt, Inc.

"Here in Washington, Blunt has converted what had been an informal and ad hoc relationship between congressional leaders and the Washington corporate and trade community into a formal, institutionalized alliance. Lobbyists are now an integral part of the Republican whip operation on par with the network of lawmakers who serve as assistant whips."

So, according to the Washington Post, at least, we can thank our boy Roy for helping to create the lobbyist feeding frenzy that has overtaken D. C. during the Bush years - a climate that has helped breed the likes of our favorite fedora-wearing shyster, Jack Abramoff.

Blunt's campaign committee has raised some $8.58 million since 1997, including $3.35 million to his (not one, but two) Rely On Your Belief funds (ROYB) from 2000 to 2002. Altria, SBC Communications, Union Pacific, Burlington Northern, Verizon, United Parcel Service and BellSouth are major corporate contributors.

Roy Blunt: Man of the People.

Within the next three weeks or so, House Republicans are going to elect a new slate of leaders in the wake of the DeLay indictment and the looming Abramoff scandal. One wonders if they have the will to really make some meaningful changes. If the GOP has any inkling of making true reforms in their party operations in Congress, they might want push ethically challenged fundraiser types like Blunt to the background and place some people with higher ideals in positions of leadership. I wonder, what's the likelihood of that happening?

Roy Blunt - Ethically Challenged

It will be interesting to see if the mainstream media will ever reveal what so many people in Washington, D. C. already know about Roy Blunt's trail of ethical missteps during his climb to Majority Whip and interim Majority Leader. Here are a few questionable activities that the good folks here in God's Country probably don't want to hear about:

*Blunt divorced Roseanne Blunt, his wife of 31 years, in 2003 to marry Abigail Perlman, a lobbyist with Philip Morris tobacco, now owned by Altria.

*Altria is the largest single contributor to Blunt's Political Action Committee (PAC), Rely on Your Beliefs (ROYB), giving some $270,000 to his personal PAC.

*Just hours after taking the role of Majority Whip (Blunt was hand-picked by his mentor, slimeball Majority Leader Tom DeLay), and before anyone knew of his association with Ms. Perlman, Blunt attempted to secretly insert a last-minute provision to Homeland Security legislation that would have benefited Philip Morris at the expense of their competitors. Exactly how this was to further protect the homeland has yet to be explained. An aide to House Speaker Dennis Hastert discovered the stealth insertion and Hastert immediately had it deleted from the bill. Blunt's bold move to aid a big campaign contributor without notifying House leadership surprised many in Washington, but little was said in the media.

*Altria also contributed $24,000 to Matt Blunt's gubernatorial campaign.

*Blunt's younger son, Andrew, landed a sweet lobbyist position with Altria in Missouri just a few years out of college. He is also a lobbyist for UPS in Missouri. Both UPS and Altria are major contributors to ROYB.

*In April, Blunt successfully inserted, once again without debate or Congressional review, a provision to a Senate bill that benefited UPS and FedEx shipping companies. The bill blocked expansion of a foreign shipping competitor. UPS and FedEx have contributed a combined $120,000 to Blunt since 2001.

*Blunt is the largest single contributor ($20,000) to the legal defense fund of Jack Abramoff's good buddy, Tom DeLay.

*Jack Abramoff's phony U. S. Family Network received $500,000 from the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC), which was later fined $280,000 for this under-the-table transaction. Blunt's future wife, Abigail Perlman, was the finance director for NRCC at the time.

*Blunt's ROYB fund operated out of the same townhouse suite with Abramoff's U. S. Family Network and, for a time, was run by Tom DeLay's buddy, Jim Ellis, who now faces indictment.

Oh what a tangled web this is . . . and our boy Roy seems to be right in the thick of it all. It's no wonder that he's been listed as one of the thirteen most corrupt members of Congress by Beyond DeLay.

Missouri GOP's Dirty Money Trail

The coming months will be uncomfortable ones for many GOP politicians, including our own 7th District representative and acting house majority leader, Roy Blunt. I saw Roy's picture on the evening news tonight - it was right next to a shot of the nefarious Tom DeLay and beleaguered Ohio congressman, Bob Ney. Looks like good old Roy really has made it big this time.

Republican lobbyist Jack Abramoff's guilty plea to three felony counts of conspiracy, mail fraud and tax evasion opens pandora's box to one of the worst cases of Washington, D. C. corruption in a couple of generations. So far, GOP leaders have been relatively quiet - perhaps waiting for another natural disaster to take the headlines - but they have managed to utter a few weak defenses, such as . . . "He gave money to Democrats, too."

Well, I checked into that, and here's a list of recipients of Abramoff donations since 2000 as compiled by the non-partisan Center for Responsive Politics:

Tom DeLay (R-Texas). John Ashcroft (R-Mo.). Frank A. LoBiondo (R-NJ). Eric Cantor (R-Va.). Arlen Specter (R-Pa.). John Ensign (R-Nev.). Johnny Isakson (R-Ga.). Charles H. Taylor (R-NC). Chris Cannon (R-Utah). Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa). Mark Foley (R-Fla.). Richard Pombo (R-Calif.). Christopher S. "Kit" Bond (R-Mo.). Curt Weldon (R-Pa.). Dana Rohrabacher (R-Calif.). Doug Ose (R-Calif.). Ernest J. Istook (R-Okla.). George R. Nethercutt Jr. (R-Wash.). Jim Bunning (R-Ky.). Richard C. Shelby (R-Ala.). Tom Feeney (R-Fla.). Dan Burton (R-Ind.). Eric Cantor (R-Va.). Suzanne Terrell (R-La.). Rob Simmons (R-Conn.). Charles W. "Chip" Pickering Jr. (R-Miss.). Connie Morella (R-Md.). Gordon H. Smith (R-Ore.). James M. Inhofe (R-Okla.). James M. Talent (R-Mo.). John T. Doolittle (R-Calif.). John Thune (R-SD). Tim Hutchinson (R-Ark.). Bob Smith (R-Fla.). Bob Ney (R-Ohio). CL. "Butch" Otter (R-Idaho). Carolyn W. Grant (R-NC). Denny Rehberg (R-Mont.). Elizabeth Dole (R-NC). Heather Wilson (R-NM). J. Randy Forbes (R-Va.). Jack Kingston (R-Ga.). James V. Hansen (R-Utah). John Cornyn (R-Texas). Kimo Kaloi (R-Hawaii). Marilyn Musgrave (R-Colo.). Mike Ferguson (R-NJ). Mike Simpson (R-Idaho). Ralph Regula (R-Ohio). Ric Keller (R-Fla.). Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.). Ted Stevens (R-Alaska). Thad Cochran (R-Miss.). Dave Camp (R-Mich.). Phil Gingrey (R-Ga.). Tom Young (R-Ala.). Bill Janklow (R-SD). Craig Thomas (R-Wyo.). Spencer Abraham (R-Mich.). William L. Gormley (R-NJ). Bill McCollum (R-Fla.). Bill Redmond (R-NM). Bob Riley (R-Ala.). Claude B. Hutchison Jr. (R-Calif.). Denny Rehberg (R-Mont.). Francis E. Flotron (R-Mo.). George Allen (R-Va.). Mike Enzi (R-Wyo.). Walter B. Jones Jr. (R-NC). Paul Ryan (R-Wis.). Bob Smith (R-Fla.). Joe Pitts (R-PA). Charles H. Taylor (R-NC). Bob Ehrlich (R-Md.). Charles R. Gerow (R-Pa.). Ed Royce (R-Calif.). Elia Vincent Pirozzi (R-Calif.). Jerry Weller (R-Ill.). Mark Emerson (R-Utah). Tom Davis (R-Va.). Van Hilleary (R-Tenn.).

Notice the "R" in each case. But where is Roy?

One of Abramoff's money laundering setups was a PAC called, cynically enough, the "U. S. Family Network", which was basically one employee manning a phone and computer in the backroom of a D. C. townhouse. Millions in illicit funds swindled from Indian tribes and shady Russian gas and oil magnates came through this office. And guess whose own personal PAC shared office space with the Abramoff front? None other that our own Roy Blunt's "Rely On Your Beliefs" (clever acronym - ROYB).

There's an interesting article in the New Republic about how warm and fuzzy Roy and Tom DeLay have become over the past five years - and how this association may eventually lead to our golden boy's fall from grace.

DeLay was instrumental in boosting Blunt's rise to power in Congress, but Blunt (and his lobbyist wife) also became involved in DeLay's fundraising network, which led him into the great political fundraising arena with none other than the master of slime, Jack Abramoff.

Abramoff also reportedly gave the Bush campaign $100,000 of his ill-gotten gains. The White House, of course, denies this.

Ah, don't ya just love the GOP with their high moral stand and Family Values? One can only hope that this scandal will be the beginning of the end of their nauseating brand of "Christian" ethics in government. Almost makes you wistful for the good old days when the Dems were in power, when we dealt with simpler transgressions like questionable book deals and using congressional postage meters for campaign mail.

Interested in finding out more about who contributes to candidates? Visit a new local blog called Granny Geek. Interesting stuff.