The Washington Post says that they hired Ben Domenech to write the new blog, Red America, to provide balance to their editorial profile. Domenech is the co-founder of RedState.com and was a writer for the National Review Online. He also worked in Bush’s White House and for Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX). While at uber-conservative publisher, Regnery Publishing, he worked with the likes of Hugh Hewitt and Michelle Malkin.

If the Post is shooting for balance, they must already have blogs by comparable liberals like, say, Al Franken, Robert Scheer, Michael Moore, or David Brock. Not surprisingly, that isn’t the case.

The Post just plunged ahead with a right-wing bomb thrower who lives up to his reputation in his first installment: Pachyderms in the Mist. This screed posits that the Red America of his imagination is actually in the majority, despite the fact that Bush is a miserably unpopular president:

“Yet even in a climate where Republicans hold command of every branch of government, and advocate views shared by a majority of voters, the mainstream media continues to treat red state Americans as pachyderms in the mist.”

Do the views to which he is referring include that two thirds of Americans disapprove of his handling of Iraq and nearly half say Democrats would do better? Or that his personal approval ratings remain mired in the low 30’s? Or that 53% say they would prefer Democrats to handle the economy? Or that he has hit a new low of 28% approval for both healthcare and energy policy? Or that the word most often associated with him is “incompetent”?

For this miscreant to complain that the media, which is dominated by right-wing pundits and corporate masters, is mistreating redstaters is as laughable as his assertion that his views are in the majority. And save a couple of guffaws for the Post’s assertion that they actually care about balance.

In the wake of numerous Washington influence scandals (DeLay, Cunningham, Abramoff, etc.), Congress has busied itself debating, drafting, and ultimately neutering, legislative proposals to restore fairness and ethics to the troubled institution. However, the targets of these measures have had a rather benign reaction to them. In fact, they don’t seem to think that the new regulations will have any impact whatsoever on their activities.

An article in the Washington Post reports that…..lobbyists say they have already found scores of new ways to buy the attention of lawmakers through fundraising, charitable activities and industry-sponsored seminars. Indeed, the lobbyists themselves tell us as much.

• “Between charitable events and fundraising events, there will still be lots of ways to get in front of members [of Congress].” – Dan Danner, executive vice president of the National Federation of Independent Business (National FIB?)
• “Even if all lunches and sporting tickets are banned, legislation and regulations are so complex that the need for professional lobbyists will not diminish,”- Frederick H. Graefe, a Washington lawyer and lobbyist.
• “If meals are heavily restricted, we’re likely to see executives from the home office picking up checks because they’re not lobbyists,” – J. Steven Hart of Williams & Jensen, a major lobbying firm.

Of particular concern to the netroots is the Post’s revelation that…Lobbyists are increasing their campaign contributions, widening their use of the Internet to stir voter activism, and donating large sums to think tanks and charities…..The Business Roundtable, which represents big-business chieftains, has embraced a new technique of advertising on Web sites for grass-roots advocates. There are those who have belittled the threat of corporations, and other deep-pocketed special interests, using the Internet in deceptive ways to enrich themselves at the people’s expense. But, clearly, the community of professional persuaders has not overlooked this potential goldmine for propaganda.

Did anyone really expect Congress to deal seriously with the 10 billion dollar industry that lines their pockets and campaign treasuries? When the best reform ideas they can muster include banning former members from the House gym, it should be apparent that their efforts are less than sincere. And the fact that lobbyists are greeting these efforts with a yawn tells us everything we need to know about the resolve of Congress to stem abuse and corruption.

Friends of Wonkette discovered that, while it’s OK to fight for freedom, it’s not OK to practice it. Here is a list of the responses received when our soldiers attempted to access the following web sites:

• Wonkette (http://www.wonkette.com/) – “Forbidden, this page is categorized as: Forum/Bulletin Boards, Politics/Opinion.”
• Bill O’Reilly (www.billoreilly.com) – OK
• Air America (www.airamericaradio.com) – “Forbidden, this page is categorized as: Internet Radio/TV, Politics/Opinion.”
• Rush Limbaugh (www.rushlimbaugh.com) – OK
• ABC News “The Note” – OK
• Al Franken (www.alfrankenshow.com) – “Forbidden, this page is categorized as: Internet Radio/TV, Politics/Opinion.”
• G. Gordon Liddy Show (www.liddyshow.us) – OK
• Don & Mike Show (www.donandmikewebsite.com) – “Forbidden, this page is categorized as: Profanity, Entertainment/Recreation/Hobbies.”

Do you detect a pattern? That’s right – Wonkette and Al Franken have not been accused or convicted of crimes, unlike O’Reilly (sexual harrassment), Limbaugh (drug use/trafficing), and Liddy (Watergate).

The poor, disenfranchised lobbyists of Washington have found an advocate. The past few months, the denizens of K Street have had to suffer the embarrassment of multiple scandals. Their poster boy, Jack Abramoff, fell from his perch and pleaded guilty to multiple felonies. So did Rep. Duke Cunningham of California. Tom DeLay continues to fight for his political life along with an indictment for money laundering. And DeLay’s gerrymandered redistricting scheme is also coming under legal scrutiny. Lobbying is coming to be seen as dishonorable and corrupt.

Reformers in and out of Congress are calling for members to refrain from accepting gifts, travel, and even money, from now unwelcome lobbyists. Committees hold hearings; legislation is drafted; Sunday morning talk shows are swamped by ravenous demagogues jonesing for air time. And just when things look bleakest, a champion appears.

Sen. Robert Bennett of Utah has courageously taken up the battle on behalf of this oppressed minority. In a lonely battle for liberty, Bennett expressed concern that strong regulation of lobbyists would violate their First Amendment rights.

“Lobbying is a right, not a privilege,” Bennett said. “It’s there in the Constitution – the right to petition your government.”

Thank goodness there are brave men governing us that will sacrifice themselves to defend the constitution and the weak, downtrodden corporate shills that that document was conceived to protect.

In a just published book by former Washinton Times reporter Bill Sammon, the president has finally gotten around to showing some appreciation for bin Laden’s contribution to Bush’s campaign.

The president has steadfastly rejected any allegations that he has ever sought to politicize the War on Terror. This despite the constant and false association that he and his administration make between 9/11 and the war in Iraq. In the book, Strategery : How George W. Bush Is Defeating Terrorists, Outwitting Democrats, and Confounding the Mainstream Media, Bush comes clean and reveals that there was “enormous amounts of discussion…” about the bin Laden video released in the final days of the campaign. Says Bush:

“I thought it was going to help. I thought it would help remind people that if bin Laden doesn’t want Bush to be the president, something must be right with Bush.”

The president, and his minions in the media, then set about to disburse bin Laden’s comments throughout the mediasphere knowing full well that it was a political strategy that they were employing. So much for not politicizing the War on Terror.