Where there’s smoke, there’s fire. Karen Tumulty reports:

[S]ome sharp-eyed TIME readers were surprised last week to see a photo of the Majority Leader smoking one of Cuba’s best–a Hoyo de Monterrey double corona… The photo was taken in Jerusalem on July 28, 2003, during a meeting between DeLay and the Republican Jewish Coalition

Last year, Tom DeLay had some nasty things to say about people who engage in this kind of behavior:

Arguing against loosening sanctions against Cuba last year, DeLay warned that Fidel Castro “will take the money. Every dime that finds its way into Cuba first finds its way into Fidel Castro’s blood-thirsty hands…. American consumers will get their fine cigars and their cheap sugar, but at the cost of our national honor.”

To be fair, Tom DeLay may not have put any money “into Fidel Castro’s blood-thirsty hands.” There’s always a chance Jack Abramoff bought the cigar for him.

It’s been a long, winding, morally manipulative journey these past few years for Senate leader Bill Frist (R-TN). Originally hailed as a moderate and conciliatory antidote to former leader Trent Lott (R-MS), Frist has morphed steadily into a divisive presidential hopeful bent on securing support from the GOP’s radical right-wing base. The transformation has not escaped the notice of Frist’s colleagues, some of whom wonder aloud whether Frist’s “presidential aspirations are getting in the way of his Senate leadership position.” Below, a trip down memory lane…

Part 1: The “conciliatory” Doctor Frist

12/16/02: Frist first mentioned as candidate to be Lott’s replacement, seen as “moderate voice”: “Sen. Bill Frist (Tenn.), who helped engineer the Republican takeover of the Senate in the November elections and enjoys close relations with the White House, has some strong backers among Republicans who want a fresh face and moderate voice in the job to help the party recover from damage flowing out of racially charged remarks by Lott 11 days ago.” [WP]

12/21/02: Frist becomes frontrunner, praised as “compassionate” party savior: “Frist fits neatly into the melodramatic script of Trent Lott’s fall from power, cast as the new majority leader called on to rescue the party in a moment of peril. ‘He really shows the true compassionate conservatism,’ says Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX).” [WP]

12/24/02: Frist inducted as House leader, dedicates self to “healing wounds”: “In his acceptance speech yesterday, Mr. Frist told his GOP colleagues, ‘We must dedicate ourselves to healing those wounds of division that have been reopened so prominently in the past few weeks.’…In contrast [to Trent Lott], Bill Frist comes to the leadership with a reputation as one who knows how to bring people together. It is a skill sorely needed in both the Republican caucus and the Senate as a whole.” [WP]

3/13/03: Frist lauded as “inclusive” leader, “deferential” to peers: “Many Republican senators spoke approvingly of what they described as a more inclusive leadership style than they had seen from a Republican leader. Even as the leader steers the Senate’s agenda rightward, moderate Republican senators say he meets far more often with them, soliciting their views and making them feel valued, than did Mr. Lott… Other senators say he is unusually deferential to colleagues, frequently insisting that they take the microphone at news conferences.” [NYT]

Part 2: The combustible Mr. Hyde

3/19/04: Frist crafts party platform pandering to social conservatives: “Republicans approved a platform yesterday that puts the party firmly on the record against legalized abortion, gay marriage and other forms of legal recognition for same-sex couples, reflecting the political clout of social conservatives … Senator Bill Frist, the majority leader and chairman of the Republican platform committee, hailed the platform, titled, ‘A Safer World, A More Hopeful America,’ as a tribute to Mr. Bush when he presented it to the convention yesterday.” [NYT]

3/19/04: “Doctor” Frist diagnosis Terri Schiavo from House floor, argues for divisive Senate interference: “Bill Frist (R-Tenn.), a renowned heart surgeon before becoming Senate majority leader, went to the floor late Thursday night for the second time in 12 hours to argue that Florida doctors had erred in saying Terri Schiavo is in a ‘persistent vegetative state.’

“His comments raised eyebrows in medical and political circles alike. It is not every day that a high-profile physician relies on family videotapes to challenge the diagnosis of doctors who examined a severely brain-damaged patient in person.” [WP]

4/15/05: Frist says he’ll push for “nuclear option”: “Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist is all but certain to press for a rule change that would ban filibusters of judicial nominations in the next few weeks, despite misgivings by some of his fellow Republicans and a possible Democratic backlash that could paralyze the chamber, close associates said yesterday.” [WP]

4/15/05: Frist joins religious right telecast questioning faith of Democrats who oppose Bush judicial nominees: “As the Senate heads toward a showdown over the rules governing judicial confirmations, Senator Bill Frist, the majority leader, has agreed to join a handful of prominent Christian conservatives in a telecast portraying Democrats as ‘against people of faith’ for blocking President Bush’s nominees.” [NYT]

4/27/05: Frist rejects compromise on judicial nominees: “[Frist] rejected a Democratic offer to resolve an impasse over judicial nominees yesterday, as members of both parties said they are under strong pressure from interest groups to hold their ground…Frist told reporters, ‘Are we going to shift from that principle? The answer to that is no.’” [WP]

For all their complaining about “obstructionism,” conservatives sure seemed to enjoy slapping down Sen. Harry Reid’s proposed nuclear option compromise yesterday.

Majority Leader Frist offered his best John Wayne for the occassion: “At the end of the day, one will be left standing — the Constitution, which allows up-or-down votes, or the filibuster,” Frist said. “My goal is to have fair up-and-down votes. Are we going to shift from that principle? The answer to that is no.”

And Rush Limbaugh ridiculed Sen. Reid for being the “the first to talk about compromise, [along with] David Broder and [Sen. Joseph] Biden on television Sunday, and now we are getting the story that they are pulling back, threatening the shutdown of the Senate and talking about now compromising if Frist will go along with it, and Frist, ‘No, we’re not interested in any deal.’”

Ah the joys of selective memory. Just two weeks ago it was Senator Frist himself “saying only that he wants to maintain the current independence of the courts and hopes a compromise can avoid a fight to change the rules.” “We need to lower the rhetoric,” Frist told reporters, adding that he would offer a compromise “in the near future.” Somebody get these two some ginkgo.

In case you had any questions about why the House leadership is considering restoring the rules of the Ethics Committee, Dennis Hastert cleared it up at a press conference this morning:

I think that there’s a member, especially on our side, that needs to have the process move forward so he can clear his name. Right now we can’t clear his name.

The media wants to talk about ethics, and as long as we’re at a stalemate, that’s all that is in the press today, is the ethics stalemate.

We need to move forward, we need to get this behind us.

And you thought the Ethics Committee was about uncovering the facts and making sure members obeyed the rules. Not in this Congress.

In his Social Security roundtable yesterday, President Bush stated, “If you’ve got a good idea, bring it forward. I don’t care if it’s a Republican idea, or a Democrat idea, independent idea, Texas idea, any kind of idea, bring it forward.” Well, it seems that Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) took the president up on the “Texas idea” suggestion. The senator’s office has released a report looking at the 1981 Texas plan. In 1981, three Texas counties “decided to opt out of Social Security and instead to provide their public employees with a system of privatized accounts.” The analysis done by Boxer’s office and the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service “compares two sets of families in three different income brackets [and] shows what happens to their retirement in 2005 under Social Security and under the Texas plan.” The conclusion:

By examining the actual system in place in Texas, this study shows that Americans are worse off with privatized accounts — not in theory, but in reality.