Fred! 'Fluence

At DRUDGE REPORT :

NYT plans Monday splash on how Fred Thompson's two eldest sons, who are both lobbyists, have benefited from their father's influence... Developing..

I wonder if the paper of record will do a companion piece on Dingy Harry Reid's extensive lobbying connections in his own family? (from a June 2003 LA Times article via NoAgenda)

[...] But Harry Reid is in a class by himself. One of his sons and his son-in-law lobby in Washington for companies, trade groups and municipalities seeking Reid's help in the Senate. A second son has lobbied in Nevada for some of those same interests, and a third has represented a couple of them as a litigator.

Possibly the NYTimes is just waiting to publish a blockbuster story on all the Congressional family lobbying ties:

At least 17 senators and 11 members of the House have children, spouses or other close relatives who lobby or work as consultants, most in Washington, according to lobbyist reports, financial-disclosure forms and other state and federal records. Many are paid by clients who count on the related lawmaker for support.

I'm still waiting for the driveby media to burst into an uproar over Her Speakerness's son being hired by a firm for $180,000/year for a job he apparently doesn't need to show up for:

Several days ago, Newsmax.com disclosed that in February, shortly after his mother became the first woman speaker, Paul Pelosi Jr., was hired by InfoUSA for $180,000 a year as its vice president for Strategic Planning. Pelosi also kept his other full-time day job as a mortgage loan officer for Countrywide Loans in California. And, unlike all of the other InfoUSA employees, he did not report to work at the company's headquarters in Omaha, Nebraska.I

Wasn't SanFranNan proclaiming she would: Restore Accountability - Break the link between legislation and lobbyists by passing lobby reform? It appears she can't, or won't, even break the link between Congressmen and their lobbying family members.

InfoUSA is the same company that has provided former president Bill Clinton with a sweetheart consulting deal.

And InfoUSA is also the same company that Bill Clinton works for as a consultant, and for which the former president was paid $3.3 million over the past five years. In addition, the Clintons got $900,000 worth of free travel.

That doesn't even include the use of Gupta Airlines to ferry Hillary around.

Don't get me wrong, I have no problem with a private citizen earning a living, not even Bill Clinton. But come on, his wife is a sitting Senator and presidential candidate. If that's not an attempt to buy influence, then there is no such thing.

Finally, let us not forget the questionable ties between Mad Jack Murtha and his lobbyist brother's (at that time) firm KSA: (NoAgenda)

[...] According to a June 13 article in The Los Angeles Times, the fiscal 2005 defense appropriations bill included more than $20 million in funding for at least 10 companies for whom KSA lobbied. Carmen Scialabba, a longtime Murtha aide, works at KSA as well.

KSA directly lobbied Murtha’s office on behalf of seven companies, and a Murtha aide told a defense contractor that it should retain KSA to represent it, according to the LA Times.

and: Murtha Earmarks Trail Reminiscent of ABSCAM Scandal

[...] Murtha has obtained millions of dollars in earmarks for firms in his district, many of them clients of PMA and KSA.

[...]

A good guide to the patterns of Murtha's largesse is the client list of KSA Consulting, a lobbying firm that employs a former Murtha staffer and used to employ Murtha's brother, Kit Murtha.

Admittedly, I'm a partisan, but by no stretch of the imagination do I believe this is an issue restricted to only one party, and I'd like to see this practice of elected officials being lobbied by paid lobbyist family members curtailed.

All I'm asking is if the NY Times is going to do what is probably a hit piece on Fred! Thompson about lobbying ties, then when are they going to do the same for all of the elected officials with such ties.

Despite the Times sinking credibility and fortunes. it is still an influential source and other media follow it's lead in news and reporting. A front page splash has to be contended with, and expect other media outlets to follow the lead.

Fred! isn't a candidate (yet). He hasn't been an elected representative for over four years. Does the NY Times have a problem with his sons earning a living? Or is it only the type of living these particular sons are engaged? Maybe it's as simple as they are worried about Fred! running and this is an early shot across the bow.

This post is just a preemptive strike at the forthcoming article from the Times. We'll see tomorrow exactly what they have to say. I may have some more comments at that time, as long as I can find a secondary source to avoid linking directly to the NY Times.