By Debbie Schlussel
I guess I really shouldn’t be surprised that one “conservative” fraud is endorsing and enabling another “conservative” fraud.
And that’s why it’s sort of not a surprise that Sean Hannity is endorsing the comeback effort–a novel–by disgraced former Christian Coalition leader Ralph Reed.
Reed accepted millions of dollars of Indian tribe gambling money from jailed and convicted gambling lobbyist Jack Abramoff, while pretending he was against gambling. Reed was paid off to start phony anti-gambling protests against rival Indian casinos, so that Jack Abramoff’s Indian casinos wouldn’t have any competition.

Hannity, Reed: The Joy Luck Club
A good deal of the money was laundered through pan-Islamist Grover Norquist‘s Americans for Tax Reform, so the Indians could get a tax deduction and Abramoff’s and his co-conspirator’s expenditures would be shielded from lobbying disclosure laws and from the Indian tribes. (Norquist took his cut for providing the laundry service, and American taxpayers took a bath for giving the tax deduction.)
Reed was disgraced and lost a primary race for the Republican nomination for Georgia Lt. Governor. But he wasn’t disgraced enough.
And now Vannity is helping this rip-off artist and phony. Birds of a feather flock together. Yup, despite all that Reed did, Vannity calls him

Ralph Reed, a top-flight political player

and goes on to gush over this apparently silly book.
Then, there’s Karl Rove, who’s also lent his name and endorsement to the Ralph Reed book. The story goes that the Justice Department was set to indict Norquist and probably Reed, but Rove–then the most powerful aide to President Bush–nixed that. He took care of his old buddies.
And now he and Vannity are helping this con artist, once again:

Now Mr. Reed is dipping his toe into the Washington waters once again. The Web site publicizing the release of his book includes a list of “endorsements” from high-profile politicos. They include Karl Rove, President Bush’s former deputy chief of staff, and Fox News personality Sean Hannity. Notably absent are leaders of the religious right.

Well, at least, some people have principles. But not Vannity or Rove (not that that’s news).
You know what they say about “the company you keep.”
Oh, and by the way, can you be more cheesy than this?:

Throughout the book, Mr. Reed offers up a different side to his choirboy portrait. In describing a woman heading into court, he writes, “She wore a smart red Versace dress, sheer hose, Bruno Magli stiletto-heeled boots and Chanel sunglasses.” And he’s no prude. He writes that a speech given by the independent candidate who had a Christian conversion had “touched every evangelical erogenous zone.”

Brainless stuff only a guy like Vannity could love. He calls it “spellbinding” and “a must-read.” Hilarious. Apparently, it “touched every Hannitized plagiarism and fabrication zone.”
National Review Editor Rich Lowry–who removed my work, which he admitted was 100% accurate, from NRO at the request of Norquist, Islamist Suhail Khan (whose father raised money for Al-Qaeda), and CAIR–also embraces crooked Reed and gushes over his cheesy tome:

Ralph Reed is one of the country’s most brilliant political practitioners and commentators. When he lets his imagination loose in Dark Horse, it’s an exhilarating ride.

This is coming from the editor of National Review? William F. Buckley is turning over in his grave.
Yes, it’s easy to be “brilliant” when you’re getting millions under the table to scam everyone. Usually, though, it’s called “a con.” We’ve already seen “his imagination,” and it’s hardly exhilarating. Just despicable.
On this one, I’m with the liberals:

“Ralph Reed betrayed those who trusted him the most,” says Melanie Sloan, executive director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, a liberal-leaning watchdog group. “He was supposed to be this person of deep principle and conviction.” . . .
In January, Mr. Reed appeared as a commentator during CNN’s New Hampshire primary coverage, but he disappeared after a newspaper blog raised questions about it, and Ms. Sloan’s group complained.
Mr. Reed hopes to get involved in electoral politics, saying: “I expect to be involved in helping to put people with solid conservative convictions in public office for the foreseeable future.”

Um, how would he know anything about “solid conservative convictions”?