Replies

Thanks for the ping. Your essay is well written and I agree with much what you said. Politics is a rough and tumble game. It always has been, and even though it seems much rougher as of late, that's still nothing compared to other times in our nation's history.

Contol of the multi trillion dollar pot of $$$ sitting in D.C. makes politics an extremely high stakes game and each party is going to pull out all the stops to maintain as much control as possible over doling out the kitty to their constituencies.

But although I agree with your assertion that the "outrage" against Bennett's gambling has been manufactured, the facts of his gambling escapades have not. This is a quote from one of the left-wing articles about the gambling and it is a result of investigative reporting. Even if you throw out the anecdotal comments by casino employees, there is still a paper trail. To his credit, Bennett has apologized for his gambling and says he will not do it again. He did not, however, deny the facts of the reports.

Bennett has been a high-roller since at least the early 1990s. A review of one 18-month stretch of gambling showed him visiting casinos, often for two or three days at a time (and enjoying a line of credit of at least $200,000 at several of them). Bennett likes to be discreet. "He'll usually call a host and let us know when he's coming," says one source. "We can limo him in. He prefers the high-limit room, where he's less likely to be seen and where he can play the $500-a-pull slots. He usually plays very late at night or early in the morning--usually between midnight and 6 a.m." The documents show that in one two-month period, Bennett wired more than $1.4 million to cover losses. His desire for privacy is evident in his customer profile at one casino, which lists as his residence the address for Empower.org (the Web site of Empower America, the non-profit group Bennett co-chairs). Typed across the form are the words: "NO CONTACT AT RES OR BIZ!!!"

I stand by my condemnation of Bennett's gambling excesses. He has been in politics a long time and knows that you dare not give your opponents ammo to use against you. Bennett gave them an arsenal. As a result, he has damaged his credibility as a moralist, at least for the near future.

I was one of the very few in this forum who staunchly defended Trent Lott (though not a great fan of his) against the manufactured outrage. I defended Lott because I truly believed his comments were not racist, but were just an awkward attempt to praise an old man at his retirement. Others said Lott was a seasoned politician, he shouldn't have given his opponents the ammo. I disagreed strongly and said the GOP should stand by him or they would invite more of this manufactured outrage in the future.

But I think the Bennett incident is different. Bennett, who has made his career and fortune on a moralist platform, intended to gamble, gambled to the extreme and tried to hide it. It's a pattern of behavior that's documented. Lott's was a mere slip of the tongue, I believe.

But I think the Bennett incident is different. Bennett, who has made his career and fortune on a moralist platform, intended to gamble, gambled to the extreme and tried to hide it. Yes, the Bennett 'incident' IS different, but not because comparisons to other personal assaults stand or fall as similar (done by both parties but now the central stealth main theme in DNC build up to 2004); it is the 21st Century zeitgeist of America's peril that makes the politics of class envy and division among the people so much more endangering.

I stand by my initial assertion, that what is usually merely dirty politics, at this juncture in America's war for survival rises to the level of dangerous divisive manipulation quite capable of destroying our resolve as a unified people at war.

To believe the DNC isn't aware of the divisive potentials and seeks to exploit those potentials is naive at best. The clearly evidenced bitterness of Democrat Party leadership driving their obstructionism speaks volumes regarding the DNC desperation and willingness to in fact embrace the schism approach to 2004 ... divide and conquer may have two enemies planning to exploit the methodology, the dividers (Democrats willing to have this nation absorb any hits, economic or to citizens) and the enemies of America seeking any weakness to exploit for death and mayhem.

So far, the political pundits have chosen to not address this reality. I don't believe I'm so undiscerning as to be imagining the DNC command or desire for this division among the people; too many examples have already been exploited through the complicit media, too many radically partisan pseudo-journalists have outed their clear aim to aid in dividie and conquer. Ignoring an angry king-cobra in your living room can get you killed. The venom of democrat bitterness is dripping from too many gaping maws for this old boy to ignore it, the pile of bones collecting beside the DNC hit people is growing too large to step around it. This is the season for the Carvile snake(s). Watch for them, coming to a TV screen on an alphabet network near you.