The Democrats had been in control of Congress for quite some time, and as it tends to happen when one set of people is in power too long, some of them became corrupt. I think the main difference between now and then is the multiple levels at which there is corruption in today’s Republican party.

Not only are the leaders of both sides of Congress in trouble, the White House, DOJ, and other agencies are all facing allegations of wrong doing and ethics violations. This Jack Abramoff character for example has ties to just about everyone in the party, and it’s looking like he’s dirty as sin. Then there are things like former Illinois Gov. George Ryan who just this week is finally being held accountable for his role in state corruption over the past decade.

It just seems you can’t turn on the news in the past few years without hearing about someone from the GOP who’s under investigation, and I think that’s the big difference between the situation that brought forth the “Gingrich Revolution” and the situation we have within the Republican party today.

Of course, that’s not to say that current Democrats don’t have their issues either. William Jefferson is a Represenative from Louisiana for example who’s under investigation for corruption. But I don’t think it’s anywhere near the level of corruption we’re seeing from the Right, because as I said above, it usually takes long periods of being in power to corrupt people, and the Democrats haven’t been in control for a long time.

I think the level of corruption that brought about the “Gingrich Revolution” was far less than what we have today. Hopefully the American peoplw will show though that they don’t like corrupt politicians from either party in control and sweep the GOP out of office in 2006.

What is your take on the similarities?