Democratic Ethics
With three you get eggroll. . .
First there was Representative Alan Mollohan (D-WV), ranking member of the Ethics Committee. There's something fishy there, a bit of a pungent oder of less than appropriate behavior. However, no actual accusations of outright corruption, no real hint that his duties were compromise, that he sold his vote. Just some eyebrow raising deals that financially benefited his friends and may have lined his own pockets -- but nothing very concrete.
The appearance of impropriety is enough -- Mollohan stepped down from the Ethics Committee, but still denies any wrongdoing whatsoever.
That's how it's done. That's how you display integrity.
Next, we've got William Jefferson (D-LA). Much more serious allegations here. Bribery allegations. A criminal investigation, plea deals, conspiracy.
No charges, yet, but this is a stinking cloud of criminality, not just some fishiness. The Democratic leadership not only shunned him, but called for a full blown ethics panel investigation.
As you might recall, there's been a moratorium, a truce between the Dems and GOP on flinging ethics violations in the supercharged partisan atmosphere of what passes for political discourse today, ostensibly to avoid a meltdown of the legislative process. (As if...)
I'm not sure, but I doubt if it counts as a violation of the "truce" when you haul one of your own before the committee to face the music. Nevertheless, it looks like the truce is over. It seems that Speaker Denise Hastert smells blood and wants to confuse the electorate into thinking that the kleptocracy he presides over which sells defense contracts to the most lubricated palm includes the minority party as well.
I don't usually heap praise on Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, but she's called this one early, often and right. She was the one who called on Mollohan to step down and she wasted no time in distancing herself and the party from Jefferson. This is completely 180 degrees from how the Republican leadership dealt with and is still dealing with the likes of Cunningham (jailed), Delay (indicted) and Ney (about to fall, and fall huge). The GOP coddled, covered and protected their slugs, and by doing so swallowed the bile into how they conducted business. They even changed the ethics rules to shelter the criminals they embraced.
So, the question this morning, is whether we hang another member of the House Democratic Caucus out to dry do to a strictly personal indiscretion involving an automobile accident, a "fluid" story denying alcohol but admitting to an ill-advised mix of prescription medication, and a D.C. police force seemingly all too willing to sweep the whole matter under the rug.
Thank god nobody was hurt, but did the guy's last name have to be Kennedy?
On this one, since there wasn't anybody hurt (or drowned), it didn't involve any defense contractors or lobbyists or hookers or bribes or vote buying, or no-bid contracts and "earmarks"; trash him at will, but he needn't answer for anything to the Ethics Panels as long as nobody can make a serious allegation that some cops were bribed.
If that's the case, if he was merely the recipient of extraordinary courtesy and didn't actively make a deal with some police captain to look the other way about his inebriation, let him take the political hits but keep the rhetoric down to a dull roar regarding official sanctions. If, however, he did grease some palms (or someone did it for him) then throw the book at him.
I don't care who his Poppa is. If you want to politically handcuff Patrick Kennedy, now is the time to make a completely unsubstantiated accusation. Pelosi will cut him off at the knees without hesitation (or at least she should) if there's even a rumor that an arm was twisted on his behalf.
The Democrats have done well lately in cutting loose members for even the hint of sleaze. They cannot afford to allow the "they all do it" tripe to take hold if they want to end the unprecedented corruption and incompetence the GOP has been getting away with. There must be a sharp, distinct contrast between how we behave and the Republicans crime family.
Moreover, it's what I expect of all elected officials, regardless of party affiliation. I didn't like it when the Bush Twins were caught drinking under age and the incident was swept under the rub with the same efficiency as there momma's records were hermetically sealed when she ran over her boyfriend and killed him. But then again, they aren't representing anybody. It just looks bad. Vice President Cheney, on the other hand, received very special handling when he was wasted and declared that it was lawyer-hunting season. That guy is dangerous and needs to be put on a leash.

Comments
A comparison between Cheney and Kennedy is apt. Neither one wanted a breathalyzer test to be administered on the scene.
And/but (in this case) note how the initial info being released into the news cycle was the statement from Kennedy's office.
Bottom line: Kennedy should be ashamed.
Posted by: Ara Rubyan
|
May 5, 2006 09:20 AM
Ashamed to be sure, and even cited for reckless operation and possibly driving while impaired. But that's about the extent of it I should think.
Democrats shouldn't be afraid of taking our lumps. GOPers refuse to be accountable for their actions and we should show them how it's done.
Posted by: Mark Adams
|
May 5, 2006 11:21 AM
I'm of a different opinion. If he was taking legally prescribed medication and that medication caused him to drive impaired (Ambien is infamous for causing sleep walking/sleep driving) then his actions were involuntary. He can't be held accountable for something he didn't know he was doing.
Until proven differently, I'll take him at his word.
Posted by: Rosemary, QOAE
|
May 5, 2006 11:31 AM
You are taking the traditional Christian approach which is admirable.
Posted by: Ara Rubyan
|
May 5, 2006 12:40 PM
"If he was taking legally prescribed medication and that medication caused him to drive impaired (Ambien is infamous for causing sleep walking/sleep driving) then his actions were involuntary."
Hell, people are sleep-cooking and sleep-eating on that stuff - reportedly (expect to see a lot more of the Ambien defense for proscribed nocturnal activities of all sorts ;-). I'm with Rosemary, though, Democrat or Republican, I'm not happy with jumping to conclusions before the facts are known.
But, if Kennedy played the the Ambien card to avoid the consequences of drunk driving, it was both very clever and really shameful.
Posted by: shep
|
May 5, 2006 01:48 PM