New York Times' Bigotry Towards Golf

Excerpts reprinted with neither permission nor expressed written consent of the NY Times. Red denotes my emphasis.

THE MUDDYING OF THE GREENS

By ANNE E. KORNBLUT
Published: January 22, 2006

Of all the lessons to emerge from the Jack Abramoff scandal, the most culturally consequential may be just three words long.

"I'm going to go over a lot of things today, and I can take all of your questions, but let me give you the all-encompassing rule," a lawyer teaching the course began at a recent session in Miami, according to one of the participants.

"Golf," he said, pausing for effect, "is bad."

The ominous warning can almost be heard echoing across the greens of the political establishment, where the game is not only a cherished pastime but has increasingly become a critical cog in the wheels of campaign financing and lobbying. Fact-finding Congressional trips are tailored to cross paths with golf resorts. Candidates and their supporters spend tens of thousands of dollars on golfing costs each campaign cycle - more and more each year, it turns out - as part of the cost of doing political business.

But now, as the Abramoff ordeal in Washington unfolds, golf is acquiring the whiff of scandal, its exclusive fairways and cozy clubhouses redolent of an improper commerce between money and influence.

But the Abramoff scandal, which suggests that tens of thousands of dollars were spent by lobbying groups to fly lawmakers around the world to play golf, in violation of ethical and perhaps legal strictures, exposes golf as an almost irresistible political carrot that is used to buy favor and access.

Until golf entered the picture, the ethics scandal surrounding Tom DeLay was hard for many to fathom. It involved complicated transactions between obscure political action committees. (Mr. DeLay was indicted last year in Texas in a campaign finance case and has also been under investigation in Washington as part of a wide public corruption case involving lobbyists' efforts to secure legislation for their clients.) The issues are difficult to convey to average voters. But a weeklong $70,000 trip to the golf course in St. Andrews, Scotland, arranged through Mr. Abramoff, as suggested by financial records and participants in the case? To Democrats seeking to exploit the matter, that is the eye-popping stuff of scandal.

More than any other perk - except perhaps free meals and drinks at Mr. Abramoff's upscale restaurant, Signatures - expensive overseas golfing trips have surfaced as his lobbying gift of choice, meant to curry favor with lawmakers and, more often, their underpaid staff members. Golfing fees to courses in the Washington area have also been listed as evidence of attempts at bribing public officials in court documents.

The effect has been, at least for now, to cast a shadow over certain fairways. "I think what we will see here in the current environment is members being pretty careful about getting caught in golfing adventures that don't pass the sunshine test of full disclosure," said Fred Wertheimer, the president of the nonpartisan group Democracy 21 and a longtime advocate of stricter ethics rules in Congress. "How long that will last remains to be seen, particularly for those who are golf-obsessed. There's a certain golf caucus on Capitol Hill, and playing golf is very high on their list of priorities for the country."

Thus the question is raised: What it is about golf that politicians seem so unable to resist, even when their reputations, their very careers, are at stake?

"To be able to play the most challenging golf courses in the world is as good as it gets," said Terry McAuliffe, the former Democratic National Committee chairman, who shares a golfing obsession with his friend Bill Clinton. "That is a dream vacation."

"Other people shouldn't be paying your golfing dues," Mr. McAuliffe quickly added.

For Mr. DeLay, who wears his golfing passion on his plaid pants,

"Golf has a long, treasured heritage in terms of junkets and even potentially corrupt socializing," said Jan Baran, a lawyer specializing in campaign finance and ethics (and who described himself as "someone who personally doesn't understand or appreciate the allure of golf").

Who, after all, is keeping watch over lawmakers to see which golf courses they are frequenting, and with whom? (Are they proposing that we "spy" on them?)

Golf has long held a special place in political life…..

Limited to the upper classes for much of the 20th century, the game was played more by members of the Senate than the House...

Yet there have been scandals, big and small, all along the way.

During the alcohol-free era of Prohibition in the 1920's, lawmakers flocked to private golf courses because they could get a drink; President Warren G. Harding sparked a ferocious uproar over the bottle of whiskey he pulled from his golf bag…..

Dan Burton, the Republican congressman from Indiana, came under fire in 1997 for accepting an invitation to play the famous Pebble Beach tournament in California - a lifelong dream of his - at a time when the corporate sponsor of the Pebble Beach National Pro-Am Tournament had business before the committee he led.

President Bush lost his patience on the golf course one morning in August 2002.

But a vast majority of political golf outings these days take place hidden well out of public view; the remoteness and privacy of golf is one of its appeals to politicians...

All of which is perfectly legal. Most golfing members of Congress are proud of their participation in the sport, not embarrassed. Representative John Boehner of Ohio, one of the candidates running to replace Mr. DeLay as majority leader, belongs to Burning Tree despite the fact that it doesn't accept women as members.

Even Congressional members from some urban areas treat golf as a fund-raising vehicle.

They view it as something they must do - they've got to have these fund-raising events, and it's a chore," said Kent Cooper.

"You sort of wonder, do members of Congress exercise other than golf? Have they moved the smoke-filled room to the green? No one is going to stop them from taking out a cigar on the golf course."

Let's play this game again. I will further condense everything the Times wants to say about and associate with golf.

Golf is bad
ominous warning
political establishment
critical cog in the wheels
whiff of scandal
exclusive
cozy
improper commerce
money and influence
violation of ethical and perhaps legal strictures
irresistible political carrot
buy favor and access
ethics scandal
wide public corruption
eye-popping stuff of scandal
perk
curry favor
bribing public officials
cast a shadow
stricter ethics
certain golf caucus
on Capitol Hill
unable to resist
junkets
potentially corrupt socializing
upper classes
scandals
ferocious uproar
came under fire
lost his patience
hidden well out of public view
remoteness
privacy
proud
not embarrassed
doesn't accept women as members
fund-raising vehicle
smoke-filled room



Anti-golf propaganda at the Times isn't a new wrinkle. They have written almost 50 articles in the last few years ripping Augusta National for its men-only membership policy. They even went so far as to suggest that Tiger Woods should boycott the Masters to advance their agenda.

Devil's Advocate: Hey C-Nut, as usual you are overreacting to a NY Times article. They don't hate golf, just corruption.

Hey DA, I may rename you Simpleton's Advocate because you play the part far too well.

They hate suburbia.

They hate SUVs.

They think everyone should pay $3 per gallon of gasoline.

They hate golf.

DA is a simpleton because he wants to analyze this article in a vacuum rather than see it for what it is - another cog in the Times' demented worldview.

THE NEW YORK TIMES IS ALL ABOUT...

...ELITIST URBAN CHAUVINISM.

A couple more notes.

When the Times says,

"Who, after all, is keeping watch over lawmakers to see which golf courses they are frequenting, and with whom?"

Are they proposing that we "spy" on American citizens?

I get it. If Muhammad in Brooklyn is using a disposable cell phone to communicate with Al Queda....the government shouldn't monitor that call. BUT, we should "keep watch" over lawmakers on golf courses.

Very interesting set of priorities...

Also, the Times cited Democracy 21 as a "nonpartisan" group which seems to be somewhat of a bald-faced lie. From this link,

"Democracy 21," which has called for "investigations" into what they claim are "ethics violations" by Rep. DeLay, is headed by Fred Wertheimer, a long-time liberal activist who once headed the far-left group "Common Cause". Democracy 21's board of directors has given tens of thousands of dollars to Democrats, but not one single cent to Republicans; and of course, the group has received over $300,000 from George Soros' "Open Society Institute."

That hardly seems "nonpartisan" to me, but remember, this is the New York Times. Also, some googling revealed that Fred Wertheimer originally had decried Soros' soft dollar peddling but based on that above link, he opted for the 300 grand and hypocrite status.

Also there is this comical, yet telling sentence,

"Even Congressional members from some urban areas treat golf as a fund-raising vehicle."

Could you imagine that? Golfing is such depravity that even the enlightened "urban" pols get tangled in its web.

But at least the inherently morally superior urban pols resent golf,

"They view it as something they must do - they've got to have these fund-raising events, and it's a chore," said Kent Cooper.



In the above article, Terry McAuliffe righteously asserted,

"Other people shouldn't be paying your golfing dues,"

Terry, did you mean "green fees"?

"Dues" connotes country club membership fees usually paid monthly. Most people pay per round and all of the accusations in the article center around per diem courses. I seriously doubt that Terry is an "obsessed" golfer.

This a little bit reminds me of when a certain Massachusetts Senator exclaimed that his favorite member of the Red Sox was "Manny Ortiz [sic]"

(Note: Manny Ramirez and David Ortiz are two different players for the Sox - as even a casual Sox fan would know.)

And lastly,

Representative John Boehner of Ohio, one of the candidates running to replace Mr. DeLay as majority leader, belongs to Burning Tree despite the fact that it doesn't accept women as members.

Remember, golf doesn't just corrupt politics, it oppresses women.

But speaking of exclusive clubs...

....would the Times hire a born-again Christian or a capitalist?

How about an SUV-driver, a Republican, or an anti-abortionist?

Would they hire a global warming skeptic or a military veteran?

They probably don't even have one serious golfer on the "exclusive" payroll.