Cynical Nation

It would be a mistake for Republicans to make too much of the latest revelations of Harry Reid's connections with Jack Abramoff's lobbying team, which, according to the AP, are much more extensive than once believed. At the end of the day, Abramoff's story speaks primarily to the corruption of the party in power -- the Republicans. There's no denying or getting around that, I'm afraid.

Still, this new story is immensely satisfying for two reasons.

First, we can finally stop hearing Howard Dean's ridiculous talking point that "zero Democrats" have received money from Jack Abramoff. This assertion was always absurd, but that didn't stop the entire port side of the blogosphere from parroting it mindlessly. Dean's assertion is true only if one focuses exclusively on Jack Abramoff's personal contributions to political candidates as a private citizen and totally ignore the financial activities of his lobbying firm and its clients. It's bullshit, in other words, and in light of recent developments, all but the battiest of moonbats will be embarrassed to repeat it with a straight face.

Second, we finally get recognition of the fact that receiving money from Abramoff is not a crime in and of itself. Look at the contortions Josh Marshall is going through to defend Reid. That's funny, because when we were talking about Republicans, any Abramoff connection at all was seen as dispositive proof of guilt. But with the advent of the Reid story, they've rediscovered the presumption of innocence and the burden of proof. That's a good thing.

There is one aspect to the whole Reid story that gives me pause, though. Democrats may very well have to find a new campaign issue for the fall. That's a bit of a bummer, because I was looking forward to a mid-term election in which the Democrats did nothing but shriek "Abramoff!" at the top of their lungs. Oh well.