ABRAMOFF: The Christian Right Dog Fight
07 March 2006 3:21 pm by Taylor Marsh
ABRAMOFF: The Christian Right Dog Fight
cross-posted at Firedoglake
Via Max
Blumenthal comes a walk through the Christian right, with Ralph Reed all
tied together with Jack Abramoff, compliments of Dr. Dobson of Focus on the Family. Get ready for a ride.
First we've got Ralph Reed, someone I've taken aim at before. As Blumenthal
offers and I've noted, the Atlanta Journal Constitution has been hot on Reed's trail for months
and recently offered this latest dirt on the former golden boy of the Republican
Party.
Reed's work to shut down two Indian casinos
in Texas, and a third proposed for Louisiana, in 2001 and 2002, cost the Coushatta
tribe of Louisiana, whose sole source of income is a casino, an estimated $4
million. The Coushattas were another Abramoff client.
Atlanta
Journal Constitution
Of course, Ralph Reed is saying he's an innocent lamb in all this, but
of course, we all know innocence depends on who's doing the defining, especially
when it comes to Reed's ties with Abramoff. If Deborah Howell were doing the story, Reed might come out sweet, but she's not, so he likely won't. After all, we're after the truth.
Nobody wants to challenge the powerful Dr. Dobson or anything he does or sanctions.
Oh, except one person, Marvin Olasky, the guy who coined \”compassionate
conservatism\” back when Bush was governor. Olasky's the one who created Bush's Faith Based Initiative program, once he hit the White House. Well, now he's miffed and coming
after the people in the Christian right.
Olasky's World Magazine recently started the charge and took out straight for
Ralph Reed, with a some blowback hitting the estimable James Dobson and his Focus on the Family. From one evangelical to another, can you feel the love?
Meanwhile, the controversy surrounding Mr. Reed continues
to create tension for other evangelical leaders. E-mails released by the Senate
Indian Affairs Committee indicate Mr. Reed told Mr. Abramoff that he would
solicit anti-gambling help from big-name evangelicals including James Dobson
and Tom Minnery of Focus on the Family. Days later, each wrote letters to
U.S. Secretary of the Interior Gale Norton, protesting the opening of a casino
in Louisiana.In a Feb. 6, 2001, e-mail, Mr. Abramoff asked whether
Mr. Reed \”can get Dobson on the radio\” to criticize Republican Haley
Barbour for supporting the new casino's opening. Mr. Reed replied: \”yes.
there's a history there.\” Mr. Abramoff replied: \”Let me know when
Dobson hits him. I want to savor it.\” On Feb. 19, Mr. Reed assured Mr.
Abramoff: \”we're negotiating that now. don't have a green light yet,
but they are very interested.\”
So what does this all mean?
Olasky's World is directly challenging the ethics and involvement
of Dr. Dobson in Reed's shenanigans, which were all tied up with Jack Abramoff.
The World is saying that corrupt evangelicals have to stand up, admit their
wrongs, then do penance. It doesn't matter if you're Republicans or not, because
if you're involved in illegal actions you're not doing God's work, which is
the bottom line. But it's Reed that is Olasky's target.
Now Olasky is getting heat from Dobson and the whole Christian right
culture as they take a page from George W. Bush's dirty trick playbook and go
after the journalist and the publication who are trying to get at the truth.
As every regular reader of this blog knows, the thing that truly bothers me
about the right is their stranglehold on terrestrial radio. It starts with Rush
and Sean, but gets really serious as it spreads into Christian broadcasting,
which is normally not included by others when talking about the steep climb
we all have to break through. Terrestrial radio is where Republicans do their
greatest damage to Democrats, with the grass roots of Christian broadcasting
driving that damage home, as they take their voice into as many homes, with a jump into Armed Forces radio, too. After all, evangelicals are to be trusted, right?
That's exactly where Dobson ran when The World came after them.
\”They [World] have a reporter who
wanted me to dump on ralph reed because of Jack Abramoff. I wouldn't do it.
So in the story they wrote, the made it seem like I was covering up for Ralph.
they terribly misused the interview I gave them, and in the letter I wrote
them, I tried to set the record straight. They refused to print it. So maybe
I'm overreacting. But it is tough when your friends criticize you for something
that shouldn't be.\”
Olasky takes issue with the setting the record straight stuff
and comes right out to say they're targeting a good reporter doing her job,
so Olasky's not going to print just anything because they charge it.
Through The World, Olasky puts together some of the documents
from the Senate hearings of Nov. 2 and Nov. 17 in pdf form, from 2001
and 2002 in the following
article. Olasky lays out why their reporter is asking such tough questions, but who they really want to get on the record is Ralph Reed.
… … Where do we go from here? First,
the focus is on Ralph Reed. Since Oct. 31, 2005, Jamie has sought an on-the-record
interview with him. He has refused to grant one. Here’s the one mistake
we have made in this affair: We had been stonewalled so often in our attempts
to interview Mr. Reed that we stopped trying, and did not ask him about the
potential prosecution in Texas that he might be facing (\”Focus on the
finances,\” Feb. 4). That was our error: His refusal to answer questions
did not relieve us from the obligation of giving him the opportunity to comment
on possible legal action.That lapse makes us redouble our determination to keep
questioning Mr. Reed and others. We hope that Focus on the Family will join
us in insisting that Mr. Reed stop dodging and start explaining why his emails
to Jack Abramoff stated that he was negotiating with Focus. … …
Then Blumenthal directs us to Olasky's
blog that features a blockbuster finish on one of the posts.
If Reed had been transparent,
he would have faced disagreement but would not now be facing disgrace. He
has shamed the evangelical community by providing evidence for the generally-untrue
stereotype that evangelicals are easily-manipulated and that evangelical leaders
are using moral issues to line their own pockets.
The issue for me comes down to hypocrisy. You don't get to get
away with talking about Christianity, while gaming the odds from the inside
through illegal actions. You don't get to get away with a good boy image, when
you're actually doing the work of the devil by lying, cheating, scheming, gambling
and double crossing the people who put their faith in you.
I remember clearly the day before the 2004 election, when Ralph
Reed was on the \”Charlie Rose\” show. In fact, it's a scene I use in
my political show. Reed ticked off how Bush-Cheney was going to win Florida. It was chilling and I knew it was true. It was at that moment I believed we could be through. Reed's power and talent helped orchestrate that Florida victory and others. He is also one of the masterminds behind the Max Cleland smear. When asked about it he isn't even ashamed. Of course, Ralph Reed never served his country, let alone lost 3 limbs. So my motive in talking about Reed is practical. He's a political menace who is also crooked, but gets away with it through using God.
His ascent was straight to the top and ready to
rise even further until the house of corruption that Jack Abramoff built came
crashing down around the Republican Party. If Reed has done something illegal he needs to pay the price for his crime(s).
Reed also needs to pay for his hypocrisy. That another branch
of the evangelical movement is holding him to account and driving a stake through
his image is not only ironic, it's political justice of the highest order. But we need to
remember that Reed and Delay are slippery and they are also willing to use God and their Christianity to solidify their power. Dr. Dobson is a willing accomplice, as we witnessed by the letter he got from Samuel Alito, thanking him for his help in getting confirmed. He should be shamed into separating from the likes of Reed, especially if Dr. Dobson wants to keep his reputation and influence.
Max Blumenthal's article is a way through the intricacies of the Christian right's involvement in the Abramoff scandal, which is a religious soap opera of the highest order.
Just imagine the Republican
Party with a Christian right out of favor and out of power, because their pulpit politicians have been made to do a perp walk. Now hold that picture as a visualization.
