No scandals looming for the Dems...

robeiae · May 22, 2006

http://today.reuters.com/news/newsarticle.aspx?type=topNews&storyid=2006-05-23T015103Z_01_N22407388_RTRUKOC_0_US-CRIME-MILBERGWEISS-POLITICS-1.xml&src=rss

Of course, it was mostly just a misunderstanding...

Rob

BottomlessCup · May 22, 2006

How dumb do you have to be to bribe the powerless ones?

maestrowork · May 22, 2006

BottomlessCup said:
How dumb do you have to be to bribe the powerless ones?

That's what I was thinking, too.

robeiae · May 23, 2006

Yes. But now they've blown their chief issue for criticizing the Repub Senators and Reps: the culture of corruption and dealings with shady lobbyists.

Add this to the problems of Rep. Jefferson from Louisiana...

Where do they go from here?

Rob

maestrowork · May 23, 2006

We should know by now that Washington is full of kettles and pots, no matter if they're from Wal-Mart or Target.

robeiae · May 23, 2006

Hey, I'm not disagreeing with ya--I'm looking for some Democratic strategery for the mid-term elections.

A good number of Dems up for reelection are on these guys' major contribution list, as is the DNC.

For all the national talk of border politics, I think specific elections are going to be more about things like this.

Of course, Jefferson claims innocence--I don't know about you, but I always keep 90 grand wrappped in aluminum foil in my freezer...

Rob

maestrowork · May 23, 2006

robeiae said:
I'm looking for some Democratic strategery for the mid-term elections.

ROFLMAO

Hero For Sale · May 23, 2006

There are corrupt politicians on both sides of the aisle.

However, it is the Republicans that claim moral superiority, bringing dignity back to Washington.

robeiae · May 23, 2006

Hero For Sale said:
However, it is the Republicans that claim moral superiority, bringing dignity back to Washington.

Actually, no.

From democrats.org:

The Democratic National Committee has announced that it is filing a lawsuit seeking the release of Secret Service records detailing White House visits by Jack Abramoff's cronies and other central figures in the Republican culture of corruption.

And there's Pelosi (from here):

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, California Democrat, said the investigations show Republicans are "about a culture of corruption, incompetence and cronyism."

And Harry Reid (from an interview with Lehrer):

Jim, it's taken a while for this culture of corruption the Republicans have developed to come into fore. The Republican leader in the House, four ethics convictions in one year, money laundering indictment, the Republican leader being investigated criminally and civilly, we have for the first time in 135 years, someone who works in the White House indicted. Safavian, who is in charge of government contracting, the president appointed him, hundreds of billions of dollars a year, led away in handcuffs because of sweetheart deals he had with Jack Abramoff and then you have, as has been talked about earlier in your program, the K Street Project.

Since the Abramoff scandal broke, Dems have been pounding their chests about this Republican 'culture of corruption.'

Rob

clintl · May 23, 2006

Uh, from what I see in that article, the crimes Milberg Weiss is charged with are related to lawsuits it filed, not its political donations. That's not even remotely the same kind of situation as the Abramoff case.

Now Jefferson - he's going down, and good riddance.

robeiae · May 23, 2006

clintl said:
Uh, from what I see in that article, the crimes Milberg Weiss is charged with are related to lawsuits it filed, not its political donations. That's not even remotely the same kind of situation as the Abramoff case.

Except those lawsuits are ones wherein lawyers fees could be curtailed, do to certain legislation--legislation opposed by many of those on the contribution list. The fact that the legislation passed, despite the lobbying efforts of Milberg Weiss, may very well be the key to preventing such charges. Saved by their own stupidity...

Rob

P.S. And still: what will this do to the mid-term election platform of the Dems?

Hero For Sale · May 23, 2006

The quotes Robeiae offered do not refute the statement that Republicans claim moral superiority.

They indicate that the Democrats are complaining about Republican corruption, not claiming to be morally superior and above reproach.

So, actually, yes.

robeiae · May 23, 2006

Hero For Sale said:
The quotes Robeiae offered do not refute the statement that Republicans claim moral superiority.

They indicate that the Democrats are complaining about Republican corruption, not claiming to be morally superior and above reproach.

So, actually, yes.

If you claim there's a culture of corruption in the other party and that electing your party will end this culture of corruption, implicit in that stance is the assumption that your party is not afflicted with this culture of corruption.

If that's not attempting to claim the moral high ground, I don't know what it is. So actually, no.

Regardless, you're not bringing any actual evidence to the table: it behooves you to offer evidence that "Republicans claim moral superiority." Why should I do your work for you? Do it yourself and come back when you have a rational point to make, supported by something other than a MoveOn.org talking point.

Of course, I know that there are specific Repubs who claim 'moral superiority,' and who are probably every bit as corrupt as any Dem. I'm not really questioning that. However, it will be humorous to see the backpedaling and twisted analysis offered to rationalize these incidents. And, most importantly, it will be interesting to see how this affects the elections--hey, maybe the Repubs are too far gone and it won't matter a wit.

Rob

maestrowork · May 23, 2006

I am not sure if there's any backpedaling. The Dems have already asked Jefferson to resign, and I don't think they're on his side -- I believe they are condemning any wrong-doing, which is the right thing to do. Jefferson is alone in this. However, the same can't be said about the GOPs when DeLay or Frisk was implicated in corruption scandals -- they pretty much all kept their mouths shut. And you can't say, "Oh, there's a bad apple in the barrel, so the barrel shouldn't complain about bad apple anymore." I think that's playing politics, and Rob, you're better than that.

Hero For Sale · May 23, 2006

One thing we need to remember is that when Republicans engage in corruption, it is for the best interest of America, not the money or the power.

So I guess it is okay.

WerenCole · May 23, 2006

Can't we get something a little juicier than this? I mean sh!t, what happened to the glory days of the Democrats being inscrutablle womanizers and sheisty real estate dealers? I miss those days. Now all I get is idiot hypocritic Republicans and mild mannered idiot Democrats. . . for the love of all that is good and holy, Bring Monica Back To Capitol Hill!

Hero For Sale · May 23, 2006

Sadly, the days of needing to dispose of dead hookers on Capitol Hill are over.

robeiae · May 23, 2006

maestrowork said:
I think that's playing politics, and Rob, you're better than that.

You're reading me wrong. I'm not defending the Republicans with a 'look, the Dems do it, too.' I'm asking the question (that no one seems to want to discuss): what does this mean for the upcoming elections?

Personally, I think it will knock some of the steam out of the Democratic platform, but I don't think it's sufficient to help some incumbents who are in danger--maybe just one or two.

As to Jefferson, he's still claiming innocence--when the conspiracy theory comes out, let's see if any Dems hedge their bets. And who asked him to resign?

Rob

billythrilly7th · May 23, 2006

Hero For Sale said:
One thing we need to remember is that when Republicans engage in corruption, it is for the best interest of America, not the money or the power.

So I guess it is okay.

Yes, well said.

Thank you.

maestrowork · May 23, 2006

robeiae said:
You're reading me wrong. I'm not defending the Republicans with a 'look, the Dems do it, too.' I'm asking the question (that no one seems to want to discuss): what does this mean for the upcoming elections?

Personally, I think it will knock some of the steam out of the Democratic platform, but I don't think it's sufficient to help some incumbents who are in danger--maybe just one or two.

As to Jefferson, he's still claiming innocence--when the conspiracy theory comes out, let's see if any Dems hedge their bets. And who asked him to resign?

Rob

First, they need to get Jefferson out of there. Whether he's guilty or not is not the Dems' concern now. They shouldn't do what the GOPs did with DeLay -- just let it dangle and linger like it didn't happen.

If they're smart, they should address the issue head-on and be honest about it that it's a problem in Congress, and not a partisan issue. Then they can still turn it around and say, see, we Dems are serious and we want to clean house and do the right things, unlike... the GOPs which continue to stonewall any scandals and pretend all is well. Set a frigging example, and let the country know that they mean business and they're not going to let one bad apple ruin the whole barrel.

It takes guts and a strong party. Unfortunately, I am not sure if the Dems have what it takes.

It's an election they stand to lose. They can't depend on the GOPs to "screw up" anymore. They will have to rise up, wise up, and do the right thing.

Unfortunately, in the game of politics, I am probably getting it all wrong.

TheGaffer · May 23, 2006

Personally, I think it will knock some of the steam out of the Democratic platform, but I don't think it's sufficient to help some incumbents who are in danger--maybe just one or two.

There's nothing to say the Dems, in power, would have or would not have been as corrupt as the GOP (although this current regime really puts it to the test, I think). But the influence-peddling operation DeLay was running and the number of top officials involved in some kind of investigation kind of outweighs the numbers on the Dems' side right now by a significant margin. The fact is, the GOP is in power now - both houses of Congress and the administration. So they're in the position to be the more corrupt ones. Which they went ahead and did and with relish, too. "Culture of corruption" is indeed the term. As for the "honor and dignity" thing, that dates back to when W was first running for the White House, when he pledged to restore honor and dignity to the office. This seems to have meant that he doesn't sleep around on his wife, because there isn't any other remotely applicable definition.

clintl · May 23, 2006

robeiae said:
Except those lawsuits are ones wherein lawyers fees could be curtailed, do to certain legislation--legislation opposed by many of those on the contribution list. The fact that the legislation passed, despite the lobbying efforts of Milberg Weiss, may very well be the key to preventing such charges. Saved by their own stupidity...

Rob

P.S. And still: what will this do to the mid-term election platform of the Dems?

It's not corrupt to give campaign contributions to those who are already inclined to support the policies you favor. If you're going to make that argument, you might as well be making the argument that all campaign donations under all circumstances are corrupt.

If you want to go there, fine. The alternative is public financing of campaigns, which I have yet to hear a conservative endorse.

robeiae · May 23, 2006

clintl said:
It's not corrupt to give campaign contributions to those who are already inclined to support the policies you favor.

That's an assumption--you don't know that specific members of Congress where not specifically asked to vote a certain way for those contributions on the approriate legislation...and neither do I. As I said, the failure to defeat the legislation means such charges/allegations will probably never be made/assumed/suggested/investigated.

As for public financing of campaigns...that's a good way to crush political participation once and for all.

Rob

clintl · May 23, 2006

robeiae said:
That's an assumption--you don't know that specific members of Congress where not specifically asked to vote a certain way for those contributions on the approriate legislation...and neither do I. As I said, the failure to defeat the legislation means such charges/allegations will probably never be made/assumed/suggested/investigated.

As for public financing of campaigns...that's a good way to crush political participation once and for all.

Rob

And the article doesn't say any members of Congress are suspected of such conduct - so until someone actually makes an accusation, the assumption is probably on pretty solid ground. Right now all the article says is that a corrupt corporation was making donations that didn't have anything to do with the crimes they committed to politicians of one party.

No scandals looming for the Dems...

Touch and go

Getting settled

Fear the Death Ray

Touch and go

Fear the Death Ray

Touch and go

Fear the Death Ray

Touch and go

Represent.

Touch and go

Touch and go

Fear the Death Ray

Funny what? Do I amuse you?

Touch and go

Fear the Death Ray

Docking Bay 94

Represent.

Touch and go

Represent.