Yes, thanks to working in a bookstore, I get to peruse terrible books without having to buy them, or even sullying my library borrowing record. And so, at the risk of sacrificing my sanity, I've slogged through Tom Delay's No Retreat, No Surrender, released this past weekend in order to report on it.
Although we may scoff and joke, in truth I think this is serious stuff. People like Tom Delay still think that they are nothing more than the victim of evil liberals, and think that they can rehabilitate their images and their careers. We need to stop them from doing so.
In any case, the previous installment of this review can be found HERE. And now, join me below the fold, if you dare, for part 2...
We left off just as Delay was relating the start of his career in politics, a period during which he sadly regrets not having lived up to his later ethical standards. Wow. So what exactly were his failings during those early years? Well,
I had come to the [Texas State Legislature] House with a bit of a chip on my shoulder. The truth is, I didn't like most of the people I served with, and it showed. I had decided to be a hard-ass....I was proud, I was prickly, and I was an idiot. (Page 59)
OK, I'm still trying to understand what was different about him in those early years. But let's read on...
Knowing I was ineffective in those early years, I began paying attention to how the Democrats worked....The first thing I noticed as I watched the Democrats was that they based their politics on personal relationships. This was more than just knowing the right people and knowing whose palm to grease....They knew how to tell a joke, how to talk about a man's interests, and how to keep political fights from getting personal. I was frankly horrible at all this, and it was because, again, I hated these people. I thought they were in power to destroy my country, and I had no intention of giving them even an inch. I quickly realized that if I was going to get anything done in the House I had to change.
I watched [Texas House Speaker] Billy Wayne Clayton closely....He also knew the power of a favor. The day after he was elected to the speaker's chair, he would collect pledges to vote for him as speaker in the next session. Those pledges would become the basis on which he would make committee assignments. He was always careful to make sure the rules protected his position.(Pages 60-61)
Well, at least Delay proves consistent in his knack for taking perversely opposite lessons from his life experiences, as we saw in my previous installment. Here, it seems the valuable, positive lesson he learned was that the way to effective government is to grease palms, trade votes for committee assignments and other backroom favors, and to protect your power base by manipulating the rules.
But its nice to know that while he is willing to learn and change in these wonderful ways, he has always remained true to his statesmanlike core principle that liberals and Democrats "were in power to destroy my country."
Okay, so what else did Delay learn during his years in the Texas House?
Then there were the lobbyists. When I first entered the House, I thought most of these people were snakes. I intended to be above them. In time I realized that lobbyists represent issues and people I had sworn to serve. A lobbyist can be an important conduit of information and an important link to the institutions of society. You learned to know which one kept their word and which didn't (Page 61)
.
Ah yes, so we see that the second proud lesson Delay took from his Texas legislature days was that lobbyists were good...at least the lobbyists you could trust. Okay, now after reading that, I'm sure you're dying to hear what Delay has to say about Jack Abramoff, Indian casinos and/or sweatshop labor in the Marianas Islands (to provide just a few links to peruse in this complicated subject; see also dengre's years of excellent work on the subject).
Okay, I'll jump ahead to it...but you'll be disappointed (though unsurprised), since Delay devotes a mere four pages to all this, in the section of the book entitled "Ten Liberal Lies You've Heard About Me:"
It's odd to me that the harder I work to champion freedom, the more the left accuses me of supporting slavery....Prior to self-rule, the [Marianas] islands had been a welfare state. Everyone was dependent on the government, much like on an Indian reservation....The divorce rate was high, alcoholism and drug abuse were rampant, and the people were despondent. All this began to change when the federal government, hoping to jumpstart the economy of the islands, made them into a tax-free, labor-restricted zone....
Now freedom brings problems, and the Marianas' version of freedom was no exception. There was astonishing prosperity, but there was also the occasional charges of corruption or mistreatment of workers. Were there sweatshops? I imagine there were for a time. Were any workers mistreated? I can't imagine that thousands of human beings worked together without some abuses occurring. Was there prostitution or sexual slavery? Well, in 1998, I decided to investigate for myself. The Marianas government invited me to visit, because they were hoping I would help them oppose the Clinton administration's efforts to restrict the freedoms--such as being tax-free and labor union-free--that had led to astonishing prosperity in the islands.
What I found was what I said at the time: The Marianas Islands were the Galapagos Islands of free enterprise....As I toured the islands I saw beautiful, air-conditioned dormitories and factories. I also saw some unfinished buildings with nasty toilets and exposed wiring that had been...presented in the States as typical of conditions there.
That's it. That's Delay's defense of the Marianas Islands deal. And really, tell the truth. It only differs in a few very minor details from, for instance, this account from CNN:
According to law firm records recently made public, lobbyist Jack Abramoff, paid millions to stop reform and keep the status quo, met personally at least two dozen times with DeLay on the subject in one two-year period. The DeLay staff was often in daily contact with Abramoff.
DeLay traveled with his family and staff over New Year's of 1997 on an Abramoff scholarship endowed by his client, the government of the territory, to the Marianas, where golf and snorkeling were enjoyed.
DeLay fully approved of the working and living conditions. The Texan's salute to the owners and Abramoff's government clients was recorded by ABC-TV News: "You are a shining light for what is happening to the Republican Party, and you represent everything that is good about what we are trying to do in America and leading the world in the free-market system"
It's just liberal lies that Delay might have been influenced by the millions in lobbyist dollars. It's just liberal lies that the cushy junket provided by the Marianas might have painted a unrealistically rosy picture...after all, they were honest enough to show Delay those nasty toilets, so surely they would have been just as honest in showing any sweatshops or human slavery. Right?
Oh, and regarding that film clip by ABC News? Delay has something to say about that as well:
One of my most unforgettable memories from the trip was the conduct of an ABC film crew. I had noticed they were following us, and I suspected they intended something less than the truth in their story. I became certain of this while I was attending a reception, and I looked up to see the ABC crew filming us from behind some bushes. I called to them to join us....They refused, and I'm sure the television audience back home was later treated to scenes that were described as some secret, shady meeting attended by Tom Delay. Pictures of me eating cheese and crackers were all they had, but they were probably more dramatic shot through tropical undergrowth.
In other words, the fact that he was captured on film lauding sweatshops and expressing the wish that corporations in the United States could enjoy similar 'freedom' over their workers does not matter. No, all that matters is that the press was sneaky about recording him. More liberal press witch-hunting.
And how about Jack Abramoff? Well:
Let's cut to the chase. I had a friendship with Jack Abramoff. We were not close, but we did like each other, and we did work together on a number of political ventures....I also liked him, I am happy to admit, because he is an Orthodox Jew, and I have a deep love for the Jewish people. Part of this comes from my reading of the Bible, which tells me to bless and honor the Jews as God's people....
He never asked me to do anything unethical, never brokered our relationship so far as I knew, and never involved me in anything that was shady.
I have not seen him for years as I write this, but I understand that he has admitted to unethical and illegal behavior, and that he will serve time in jail. I've read that he apparently told the press that I had no involvement in what he is in trouble for.
That's about it for what Delay has to say about Abramoff. I told you you would be disappointed! But it does back up that earlier lesson Delay said he had learned in the Texas State House: "You learned to know which one kept their word and which didn't."
Delay does devote a few similarly arms-length, passive paragraphs about other associates: Tony Rudy ("fallen into trouble"), Ed Buckham ("fallen under suspicion"), and Michael Scanlon ("character flaws or decisions may have ensnared him") But as for Delay himself:
"I can say I had no unethical or illegal involvement with any of them."
Hey, that's strong enough evidence for me!
But now back to our story. What was it that inspired Delay to run for the U.S. Congress? Here's the scoop:
Still, I have the EPA [Environmental Protection Agency] to thank for one thing: I was so infuriated by their high-handed banning of a helpful substance, wisdom and compassion to the contrary, that my anger became the determining factor in a decision to run for Congress. (Page 68)
The substances in question were pesticides, and as we saw in yesterday's installment, Delay felt strongly about preserving the freedom to reek from the exposure to toxic chemicals.
But Delay was disappointed when he first came to Congress:
Most of the old Republicans I encountered in Congress when I arrived reminded me of what I'd heard about communists in Europe. They would sit around in coffehouses and talk about what would happen "come the revolution," but never do anything to make a revolution happen. (Page 77)
Yes, that's how I remember the Republicans in the 1980s: nothing more than a bunch of would-be beatniks. But what finally got the revolution started: "Then came Newt Gingrich."
And though Newt was an inspiring leader, Delay also put to use those valuable civic lessons he'd picked up in Texas, as described above.
My plan was to try to get on the Committee of Committees first. This is where most of the committee assignments are made in Congress, and these assignments are everything. They determine status, power and policy. [my emphasis]
I know that what I am describing may appear to the inexperienced as a cynical grasp for personal power. It isn't....I had not come to Congress to play loyal opposition. I had come to see my ideas win, and seeking the choice assignments on the right committees was the way to take victory in hand. (Page 80)
Inspiring. I especially like the order in which he lists his objectives: status and power are more important than policy.
Delay remains proud of the Contract with America put forth by the Republicans in 1994.
We were making history, though you would not have known it by the way our achievements played in the press. Critics assailed us as all talk and no action....This was because in the first one hundred days of the Congress only two bills were signed into law. Only one was signed into law in the second hundred days. In fact, for the entire first year of the 104th Congress, only eighty-eight bills became law, the fewest passed in a session since 1933. (Page 108)
Okay, so here Delay insists that the worst record in 61 years was an historic achievement, unless you listen to the lies of the liberal press. Once again, he manages to pull the most ass-backward conclusion out of the facts as he lived them.
Let's learn what Delay thinks of Bill Clinton:
Much of what energized our revolution was our visceral opposition to Bill Clinton....I openly admit that I just don't like the man, and my disgust is both personal and political....[H]is brand of liberalism had an almost anti-American feel to it....Yet it wasn't just Clinton's left-wing politics that incensed me. It was his character. Pages 108-109)
Ah yes, more inspiring paeans to statesmanship from Delay. He lists a lot of complaints about Clinton's politics and his character, but here is the defect that really sealed it for him:
I even gained an insight into his character through his golf game....Now Clinton publicly claimed to have a 10 handicap, but I had a 10 handicap, and I could tell that Clinton was nowhere near it....I wrote him a letter telling him that I had watched his swing, that I knew he wasn'r even close to a 10 handicap, and that I would play him anytime, anywhere, for any amount of money...but he never had the guts to play me. (Page 110)
Okay, I think I've had enough, and I suspect you have too, if you've even stayed with me for this long. Enough of hearing that people who don't share his truth as received from God are anti-American and evil. Enough shallow and transparently content-free defenses of the unethical behavior that I truly hope will bring him some well-deserved jail time. Enough immature bragging about how its OK to try and impeach a President because you think he's lying about his golf swing.
The fact is, this book has nothing in it to make any reasonable person respect Tom Delay. At best, you feel sorry for him for his self-delusion (though I personallly don't feel one bit sorry for him.) It is utterly un-ironic in its defense of power and corruption as the proper tool for governance. It is laughably disingenuous when it comes to explaining away his ties to Abramoff and his cover-up of slave labor in the Marianas. He seems clueless about how his portrayal of himself actually bolsters the accusations against him.
Still, let me leave you with one last bit. Here's his explanation of his famous mug shot when he was indicted, the one with the big cheery smile:
I said a prayer and offered the best smile I could muster. All I wanted was for people to see Jesus in my life at that horrible moment. Thankfully, the picture my enemies wanted so desperately to be a sign of my downfall became instead a symbol of my new life. And, believe me, that new life has just begun!
No, Tom. All I see is the picture of a self-deluded criminal. And yes, your new life HAS just begun...but it isn't going to be the life you expect it will be.
Let's all make sure of that, shall we?