This is something remarkable. The conservative NRO blog has an article which, up to a couple of sentences, would fit as a diary here at dKos. The author Rich Lowry, one of the National Review editors. Here is how the article goes:
The instruments of this perversion are “earmarks,” special provisions attached to spending bills that direct federal money to specific projects. Earmarks are how Congress diverts spending to pork-barrel local priorities and to other special interests. This practice has long existed, but Republicans have made it part of the fabric of their governing.
The article gives numbers:
The number of firms registered to lobby members on the appropriations committees increased from 1,865 to 3,523 between 2000 and 2004, according to Knight Ridder. For relatively small fees to lobbyists and donations to congressmen, corporations and localities can get a big payoff.
So conservatives were certain what corruption is in 1994. Little did they know… How the current state of affairs should be named, “supercorruption”?
Then a few examples are given, quite telling. As I said, you can just put that full article here as a diary. The only part where we would clearly dissagree is the penultimate paragraph:
Oh no… The difference between the new and old “appropriators” is like a difference between a porno star and a drunk slut. (Sorry, I am inspired by the Rude Pundit.) What is hard to imagine is a Republican congressman who would refuse a fat mutual “contribution”.
Rich Lowry even admits:
Yeah, Cunningham got ashamed too. Not every congressman can be “subtle” for ever.
P.S. The sign off of the article is a stark contrast nevertheless:
Ah, those disastrous terrible Clinton years… What price will we pay for the Bushy “booming” years?
[ Crossposted at dKos. ]