- This topic is empty.
-
AuthorPosts
-
November 24, 2010 at 11:57 pm #597114
charlabobParticipanthttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/24/AR2010112400545.html?hpid=topnews
My turkey and I salute the people on one Texas jury —
November 25, 2010 at 12:38 am #709187
DPMemberEven after the money-laundering scandal broke, Tom Delay continued boasting about what a model citizen he was and praying that God would remake America in his (Delay’s) image.
To which my friend Tevye the Dairyman might say: If God took advice from fools, the world would look very different.
Typical excerpt from one of Mr. Delay’s “sermons”:
America was created by God to spread the Gospel; to spread the word of Jesus Christ and to propagate Christianity. And the reason I know that is because my entire political career is exhibited [sic] by that.
Yeah . . . right, Tom.
Â
November 25, 2010 at 7:09 am #709188
JoBParticipantcouldn’t happen to a nicer guy
November 25, 2010 at 4:07 pm #709189
redblackParticipanti was just wondering what took them so effing long. that guy should have been convicted years ago.
November 25, 2010 at 4:12 pm #709190
dhgParticipantNovember 25, 2010 at 6:46 pm #709191
dawsonctParticipantI’ll wait for the sentencing.
The kind of “people” he runs with, a conviction won’t be much of a negative.
—
If he DOES get locked up, do we try to rehabilitate him? His type is always prone to recidivism.
November 25, 2010 at 7:39 pm #709192
hooper1961Memberand don’t forget jim mcdermott got caught using an illegally gotten tape conversation and yet he still is in congress! as far as i am concerned they are all crooks. it is time for term limits so that representatives make decisions based on the overall good of the country not the next re-election.
November 25, 2010 at 7:46 pm #709193
miwsParticipantNovember 25, 2010 at 9:15 pm #709194
Genesee HillParticipantYeah, Jim Mcdermott still got over 80% of the vote, also.
Personally, I am against term limits. If I like someone, I prefer the chance to continue voting for that person.
Besides, once they get in office, politicians seem to change their mind on term limits. Wasn’t it Nethercutt from eastern Washington who campaigned on term limits, and then changed his mind once elected to Congress?
November 26, 2010 at 7:20 am #709195
dawsonctParticipantReally, it was the WHOLE REPUBLICAN ELECTORAL CLASS OF 94 that got into office promising term limits. Republicans always run for office on empty populist rhetoric they have absolutely ZERO intention of fulfilling. See: latest examples.
Nice equivocation Hooper. McDermott jaywalks, and Delay shoots your grandmother, but they’re both criminals, so hang ’em.
Until lobbyists have absolutely no power in Washington, then I want the power to decide how long they serve me. A career politician isn’t getting rich representing me, they could be making much more in the private sector. But a short term law-maker, who will be looking for a lucrative job after their term is expired, may not have their constituent’s best interests at heart.
Take the money out of running for office, and our elected officials will be MUCH more responsive to our needs. Hell, think of all the time they will save NOT needing to raise $20,000+ per day in order to run for office again.
—
If you have a bunch of neophytes elected every few years, then it is the UNELECTED who end up with ALL the power.
November 26, 2010 at 8:59 am #709196
HMC RichParticipantCome on Dawsonct. the “whole” class? Yes both parties are as pure as snow. Uh huh.
The people elected who generally care get left out, or did. I think times are changing a bit.
But you were correct on Nethercutt and he blew it by reneging.
Yes, lobbying is a problem (unless they lobby for your/my cause). And I agree with your assessment of pay for the pols.
Yes on Term Limits. Even if it hurts my party.
Why should a man or a woman serve 20 or 30 years in the same political position?
McDermott got caught playing party politics. Was his best interest at heart or ours? He survived much better than others after getting his hand slapped.
Hey, The Hammer got hammered. Good. Get rid of all crooked politicians. Jim too I guess.
Funny, did I see a thread for Rangel or Waters? Hmmm, I can’t remember. Where are the shame on you’s for them? Hmmmmm. Oh wait, the mirror broke.
November 26, 2010 at 3:21 pm #709197
miwsParticipantdawsonct, ironic analogy.
The one time I recall seeing Jim McDermott “in person” was one day, probably around 20 years ago, as I was driving down Union St just west of 4th,and I saw him jaywalk across Union.
He lost some cred with me that day….. ;-)
Mike
November 26, 2010 at 4:17 pm #709198
SmittyParticipantNovember 26, 2010 at 6:55 pm #709199
DPMemberdawsonct said:
If you have a bunch of neophytes elected every few years, then it is the UNELECTED who end up with ALL the power.
dawson, just remember that it’s technically the unelected (i.e., the people) who do have all the power in a democracy, but that’s a quibble. What I think you are saying here is that neophyte politicians are more susceptible to outside manipulation than the veterans. Right?
I can’t agree with that. To me, it’s always the veteran politicos who seem to get manipulated more, if not by someone else then by their own egos. Over time, these “elder statesmen” tend to become increasingly disconnected and arrogant in the face of their constituents, and increasingly cozy with those deep-pocketed friends who can keep them living in the style to which they’re accustomed.
Don’t you think the corruption of Rangel, Delay, and many, many others had just a little to do with how long they’d been in office? I do.
OK, so we’re weighing the cynicism of the veteran against the naivte of the rookie, who has to learn the ropes before he can govern effectively. So be it; all other things being equal, I’ll take the newbie over the cynic. And if the job of being a congresspeson turns out to be so complicated that it takes 20 years to master, then maybe there’s something really wrong with that system. But I sense that you agree with me there already.
Ever see “Mr. Smith Goes To Washington”? That’s what I want in a congressman. Someone like Jimmy Stewart.
But perhaps I’m being the naive one now . . .
November 26, 2010 at 7:05 pm #709200
austinMemberSorry Smitty I won’t be appealing this case, I’m pretty sure it’s out of my hands now.
November 27, 2010 at 8:12 am #709201
redblackParticipantrich and hooper:
regarding rangel, waters, mcdermott, etc., the two operative words are in the title of the thread:
jury convicts.
November 27, 2010 at 9:40 am #709202
JanSParticipantredblack…that was pretty much my thought….there’s a difference between unethical and illegal….both wrong, but different punishment.
November 27, 2010 at 10:59 pm #709203
dawsonctParticipantRich, yes, the whole Republican freshman class of ’94 ran on The Contract On America, and one of the primary points in it was term limits. Those promises, much like the ones the tea bag friendly freshman Republicans are currently distancing themselves from, were quickly discarded.
In fact, I challenge you to find more than one campaign promise of the national Republicans, that they have ever followed up on.
Tax breaks? Whatever, they mostly go to the wealthy, who are currently falling all over themselves stimulating the economies of high-end jewelers, auction houses, and foreign bankers.
Smaller, less intrusive government? Fail!
Government supervision of a woman’s reproductive decisions? Fail!
Imposing Judeo-Christian (without the Jewish stuff, of course) sharia law on all of America? Fail!
Keeping liberals from takin’ yer guns! Well, none I know have ever really tried to do that, so I guess their propaganda campaign was a success.
—
Most R-&-F Republicans I know are either libertarians, or fundamentalist Xians who want everyone to conform to their views of morality, and their leadership does NOTHING but pay lip-service to their sycophants.
—
—
DP, I think, again, you are running up against problems with the way we FINANCE our elections. Remove the incentive to respond to the money, and you return the power to the electorate. If an American wants to devote their talent and ability to the altruistic pursuit of representing their fellow citizens in government, they shouldn’t be prevented from doing so, for however long they and their constituents deem appropriate.
—
I’m rather suspicious of any politician/political party that allies themselves too closely with the capitalists, as that has never seemed to work out well for the rest of us.
We need FULL public financing of elections, right now.
Some electoral reform, like instant run-off or top two voting would also help break the grip of the entrenched status quo.
November 28, 2010 at 12:22 am #709204
DPMemberYes, yes. We need full public financing of elections. No quarrel there. Just understand that public financing, by itself, will not mean an end to political corruption. Even if fat cats and corporations were barred from paying for campaigns or placing ads, they could still quietly reward politicians who helped them, in the form of cushy jobs and other perks to be received after the politician got out of office.
Corporations could also continue to influence politics by organizing citizen-based pressure groups to influence the political system indirectly. Take the NRA for example. If you instituted public financing this very day, do you think the NRA would wither and die? No way. They would still wield considerable clout through their massive get-out-the-vote machine.
No, to thoroughly remove the scourge of money from our elections, we’ll have to limit the size and influence of corporations and pressure groups as a whole. Corporations are like a bull in a china shop of politics, and you simply can’t keep a bull from tearing things up, because it’s in a bull’s nature to tear things up.
However, you can render the bull harmless by snipping his . . . well, you know . . .
His horns.
November 28, 2010 at 4:14 pm #709205
JoBParticipantHMCRich…
I must have missed the part where Rangel or Waters were convicted of criminal charges.
Can’t google it either.
Does that mean it didn’t happen?
When the degree of abuse exceeds that of congressional ethics and spills over into criminal charges..
it is well worth noting… regardless of the political party of the offender.
November 28, 2010 at 4:27 pm #709206
redblackParticipantgood analogy, DP, but even without horns, the bull still eats everything it can and lets the rabble pick up the patties. some people seem intent on feeding the bull and are happy to shovel its droppings.
others look at the bull and wonder who the hell let it in our china shop.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.