Deja Vu All Over Again

By: Gene Lyons

As I was saying, journalists seem to heed opinion polls more than politicians. Take the Washington Post's February 9^th editorial rejecting Sen. Fritz Hollings' (D-SC) call for an Enron independent counsel. "The coziness between the administration and Enron means that the scandal could conceivably implicate political figures in ways that demand an independent prosecutor", the Post concedes. "But that hasn't happened yet; nobody has credibly alleged a crime by a member of the administration. And as long as the focus of the inquiry remains on crimes by the corporation and its accountants, the Justice Department can handle the matter."

Compare the same newspaper's January 5^th, 1994 argument that Whitewater "represents precisely the kind of case in which an independent counsel ought to be appointed. We say that even though - and and this should be stressed - there has been no credible charge in this case that either the President or Mrs. Clinton did anything wrong. Nevertheless, it is in the public interest - and in the President's as well - to put the inquiry in independent hands... Nor is it protection enough to say that the investigation is in the hands of career [Justice Department] attorneys. To whom do they report?"

But that was then; this is now. Again, Enron's shady practices cost investors more than 1000 times what Jim McDougal's petty scams cost taxpayers. Shoddy and one-sided as the Post's Whitewater coverage was, its editors might argue that they'd learned something from Kenneth Starr's mad quest. Starr so discredited the independent counsel statute that the idea of reviving it makes everybody faintly bilious.

What's needed is what worked during Watergate: an independent investigator of unimpeachable integrity appointed by the Attorney General. Former GOP Senators John Danforth and Warren Rudman come to mind. Given the likely uproar when investors' names in Enron's crooked offshore "partnerships" are revealed - and remembering that crony capitalism has always been what the Bush family does best - it's going to take more than Republicans chanting that Enron's not a political scandal to restore public trust.

In political debate, the commonest logical fallacy is the Straw Man: attributing to your opponent an argument so ludicrous it's easily refuted. Crucial to success is the art of mendacious paraphrase. Here's how a recent Democrat-Gazette editorial attacking "Daschlenomics" summarized a speech by the Senate Majority Leader: "The tax cuts that the Bush administration initiated caused the recession that began last March, even though they hadn't gone into effect yet. (Actually, consumer spending rose after the Bush tax cuts were distributed despite September 11^th. But why go into detail?)"

Why, indeed? By contrast, here are Daschle's actual words of January 4^th: "By 2000, not only was the deficit gone, we had a record $236 billion surplus... For the first time in a generation, both our short term and our long term economic positions appeared strong. Then the inevitable happened. Our economy started to cool. By last March we know now the expansion was officially over and a recession had begun. Every economic boom eventually slows down. When that happens, the question is not who is to blame, but what do we do to get the economy growing again?"

Did Daschle say tax cuts caused the recession? No, he plainly said it was inevitable, and there was no point blaming anybody. As the The Daily Howler has shown, the original source of the distortion was a Washington Times column by noted economist Rush Limbaugh. What Daschle also said is that the Bush tax cuts are the single largest cause of the vanished ten year surplus, meaning higher interest rates, slower growth and a looming crisis in Medicare and Social Security.

Speaking of logical fallacies, here's another beauty. Chiding "pedants" (like me) who pointed out that President Bush's "Axis of evil" are enemies, not allies, Democrat-Gazette editors sneered that "They'd forgotten, if they ever knew, that the original Axis - Germany, Italy, and Japan - were also worlds apart culturally and sometime rivals before their evil designs united them in aggression".

To simplify, A is A because B is B, and perfect circularity is achieved.

A recent "VOICES" letter by Fred Lemon of Cabot called the Clinton administration "the most corrupt and scandal-ridden... in the history of this country". He can believe what he wants, but it's worth mentioning that not a single Clinton appointee was convicted of a crime involving overnment service. Webb Hubbell pled guilty to embezzling from his law partners (including Hillary Clinton); Henry Cisneros admitted lying about paying an ex-mistress to go away. Otherwise, five independent counsels struck out. No Republican administration in living memory can say the same.

Lemon also asserted that former Enron CEO Ken Lay "was treated to an overnight stay in the Lincoln Bedroom by Bill Clinton for his big bucks to the Democrats". Sorry, but it never happened. Lay's name does not appear on published lists of White House visitors. Former President Clinton's office told me the allegation is categorically false. Pundit Fred Barnes first spread the tale on Fox News. Maybe he was confused, because Lay DID attend a White House bunking party under President Bush's father. Barnes should cite his authority for this bogus claim or admit the error.