Rehabilitating Tommy

[Sheila Samples]

Sometimes I wonder if Americans are even capable of feeling outrage anymore. As if John Cloud's slobbering ode to Ann Coulter In last week's Time Magazine wasn't enough, that once-respected weekly is back out there again this week, cleaning up after House majority leader Tom DeLay and his corporate bitch, Jack Abramoff.

Only a villian as wicked as Darth Vader could have kicked Adam Zagorin's interview with Abramoff from Time's cover. The editors dubbed the playfully cute piece 'Jack in a Box' so that readers would not be put off by the obstinate, sheer incorrigible arrogance of Abramoff's defense of robbing Indian tribes of millions of dollars, using charities as a facade to cheat on his taxes and owning the votes of the second most powerful legislator in the House of Representatives. However, I can't help thinking if the truth fairy had intervened during the printing process, the piece would have emerged with the title, 'Rehabilitating Tommy...'

Why did Abramoff make DeLay's life just one long paid-for honeymoon? Because he wanted something in return? Because, together, Abramoff and DeLay could keep dipping into the Indian coffer honey-hole? Of course not. If we are to believe Abramoff, he was drawn to DeLay because 'of our shared interest in the Bible and like political philosophies.' And, oh yes -- because DeLay's 'a man fortunate enough to have a loving and devoted wife who shares his faith and philosophy.'

Well, alrighty then. It was because Abramoff, an orthodox Jew, and DeLay, a militant, Bible-pounding evangelical Christian, are singing off the same sheet of rapture music. It had nothing to do with the Indian 'monkeys' and 'losers' Abramoff joked about in emails concerning his dealings with the tribes. In fact, in one of his many unchallenged statements in the interview, Abramoff told Zagorin that his emails were 'taken out of context.' He loves Indians, Abramoff said. They are running a multibillion-dollar industry. His respect for them is unbounded.

Abramoff insists he is not 'a cynical barbarian' preying on his clients and paying off his legislators as he is being portrayed by a liberal media. Besides, he says, 'no worthy members of Congress or their staff would ever change their position on an issue based on anything other than their constituents' interests or their own deeply held views.'

It's in the Bible. You could look it up.

Abramoff thinks it's deliciously funny that the foolish media, the mean-spirited Democrats, and even a few ill-informed Americans would think that such noble fellows as either he or DeLay could even remotely be involved in a scandal.

Abramoff's right. As I watch these two creatures strut across the political landscape, invoking the name of God while ravaging their fellow citizens, I keep watching for thunder and lightning to strike them from above -- or sulpher and hellfire to erupt from below. And I can barely keep from shrieking with wild, maniacal barks of laughter.

[paineinthearse]

1. I pray your prophesy is correct nt