(Yes, I’m hoping this pithy phrase will get picked up widely.)
Glenn took me to mean that “Bush should be judged by his proximity to Ken Lay et al.”
That’s not what I said. I’m not shoulding here. I’m just telling you how I think this will all develop. And there’s a difference.
Also, Glenn points to this post on another site to make the case that … (drumroll) you guessed it, Clinton is worse.
The post (on another blog) lists Marc Rich, the McDougals, and even people like David Hale, who, if you actually follow these things, you know had little if any actual connection to Clinton — as opposed to fictive connections manufactured later, etc. etc. etc.
In any case, Bill Clinton had face time with some less than savory people. I’m willing to grant this. And I don’t think George W. Bush or any of his cronies are guilty of anything by what amounts to some sort of contagious guiltiness. Ken Lay’s a crook. You knew Ken Lay. So you’re a bit of a crook. Etc.
That said, you simply cannot say that Ken Lay was some dime-a-dozen campaign contributor who got his picture taken with the president at a reception. Or someone he’d had some dealings with at some point in the past. It just doesn’t wash.
Finally, TPM readers in Washington, DC can hear their Talking Points live next Tuesday night before the State of the Union. No, no streaming video or audio on TPM. But I will be doing a little pre-game on WMAL between 7 and 8 PM. I’ll update later with details.