While much of this is historically accurate, it does not support the headline or the lede--which he could have easily done as they are also true. Instead he wanders off down several side avenues that do little to support his premise. So, unfortunately, the piece winds up being dense with detail that never adds up to a single coherent argument.

A facinating history of political idealogues and how they view themselves as outsiders - even while in power. In the mean time, they relish the secure carrer move and retirement plan for political operatives, tax breaks for wealthy benefactors, wars started and maintained for the benefit of American industry, and fat contracts granted to the faithful. The other 98.1% of us will pay the bills run up by lobbyists and "angry, righteous profiteers."

This is an essay based on an upcoming book. I already have it reserved at my library. Tells the tale of modern conservatism and the crooks that turned it into a profitable quasi religious experience for young republicans. This story is very frightening but it makes the reader aware of what we are up against trying to take back our country. This is really good journalism and if there were more missives like this at least those who want to be informed can be.

How the Republicans became the nasty party of evil incarnate might be a secondary title to this piece of exellent journalism. This article gave me the chills on how any party could act in such a cold-hearted, bloodless manner toward what was to be a government for the "good of citizens." Republicans have waved good-bye to their "Eisenhower" Republican days. This is what happens when God is on their side?

Virtually a history of what passes for the conservative movement in modern times using Abramoff (as a "son of Reagan") as the center point. This quote about the results of conservatism in government is illustrative:"It is the consequence of triumph by a particular philosophy of government, by a movement that understands the liberal state as a perversion and considers the market the ideal nexus of human society." I can already hear the right claiming how biased this piece is (possibly with something about repeating left wing talking points) but it is informative.

OK, it postulates a broad theory of evil conservative takeover, focusing on a few individuals and events. A lot of what he avers is probably true. However - 'liberal' and 'conservative' influences in government tend to come in waves. Modern communications aside, is this really different from the conservative/nationalist movements, or the ethnic machine politicians (north and south), or the capitalist schemers of the 19th and 20th centuries, except that we are living with it? We seem to be about 60% through this wave - let's see what the next one brings.

The article is primarily about Jack Abramoff. Nowhere is there a mention of the democratic ties of Abramoff. Nowhere is the mention of the complete corruption of both sides of the aisles. Putting that aside, the worst thing about this article is the writing style makes it near impossible to read. I doubt one person in a thousand does more than skim past the first couple paragraphs.

The author is seriously deranged. The magazine has been in the same state for years.

This opinion piece is worthless. The author is an extremist who rants about anyone who disagrees with him. Jack Abramoff is a petty thief compared to Franklin Raines and James Johnson and Mark Rich and Norman Hsu and other Democratic super thieves. George W. Bush is not a conservative and never was. He governed in Texas as a moderate and has in Washington, too. There is nothing in the piece that qualifies as journalism.

Good story that reveals the truth about the politics we have been subjected to these last almost 20 years, run amuck in the Bush administration.

We need to be aware of things like this so we know why our economy has failed and we can vote for people who are out for our best interests, not theirs!