Meet your new thread, same as the old thread.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
They have neglected their housecleaning.

It may be a function of such decisions as politicizing the AG's office, so AGs were chasing Dems but not Rs. If you keep the watchdog muzzled, sooner or later the neighborhood burglers are going to figure out that he can't bark or bite.

It may be a function of the holier-than-thou attitude of the Christian right and the Rove/Cheney faction.

It may be a function of the last Congressional leadership - after all, if you put guys like DeLay in charge, it's hard to tell the rank and file to behave. The jackel isn't going to get the wolves to leave the sheep alone.

For whatever reason, there are a lot of trees, and until someone realizes they have a problem and do a bit of housecleaning, the little buggers will just keep sprouting. (Have I mangled enough metaphors this post?)

No, not at all. Its a very clear point. The party is a disaster. An analogy to the Catholic Church is apt. The only reason its even viable is that the Dems are almost as bad, not so much from corruption (give them time once they're in power), but because they're beholden to a whole different crop of special interests.

Lobbying should be illegal. It's just that simple. It distorts what should be an intellectual debate. And there should be term limits across the board. If we continue to allow corporations to use DC as a feeding trough, we stifle innovation and subsidize dying industries. I'm being too general here, but you know what I mean. The current "privatization" looks a lot more like subsidization. I think over time this hurts both govt and corporations and is a huge factor in the wealth disparity issue.

[Not Bob]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
You point to a policeman who is crooked . . .

A crooked policeman who, it should be noted, was nominated for a Cabinet position with a large law enforcement portfolio. Not a good place for a crooked cop, IMO.



That being said, I don't think that Kerik's indictment is a reflection on the GOP at all. I think that the Kerik thing demonstrates that Rudy is a know-it-all who doesn't listen to what he doesn't want to hear (there were people telling him about Kerik's connections to Mob businesses before he was named police commissioner), and it also demonstrates the lack of comptetence of the staff in charge of the vetting process in the Bush Adminstration.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Not Bob
A crooked policeman who, it should be noted, was nominated for a Cabinet position with a large law enforcement portfolio. Not a good place for a crooked cop, IMO.



That being said, I don't think that Kerik's indictment is a reflection on the GOP at all. I think that the Kerik thing demonstrates that Rudy is a know-it-all who doesn't listen to what he doesn't want to hear (there were people telling him about Kerik's connections to Mob businesses before he was named police commissioner), and it also demonstrates the lack of comptetence of the staff in charge of the vetting process in the Bush Adminstration.

what blogs have you read in the last week?

[Not Bob]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
what blogs have you read in the last week?

Other than philalawyer?

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
Ty, I think this man has not broadened the internet blogs he reads.

You point to a policeman who is crooked and an obese state representative from Bumfuck whereever that was trusted raising teen girls and you get to an endictment on the bush administration and congress.

You are right. I've reported only one incident yesterday and one today. I should be more comprehensive in covering the last two days' news.

So, how about that Ernie Fletcher? I know he's just a governor from some flyover state, so maybe you don't care. So how about a governor from a big state reporting to prison? Of course, they're just governors, how about instead we look at a Republican Congressman taking bribes? Or a Republican Congressman resigning after a sex scandal? Of course, there's always the "sitting" Senator, whose name seems to come up when those lowlife state legislators engage in copycat activities - hey, if you can't emulate the great Senator and protector of American values, the scourge of Bill Clinton's sins, who can you emulate? (I know, I know, the answer is someone in the Bush administration - that Time report yesterday on how the watchdogs have been corrupted really kind of says it all, doesn't it?)

Well, those are just a few of the highlights of the lowlifes from the last couple of days. I really am sorry I'm not being more thorough, and can just hit a few low-lights. As I have time, I'll try to highlight a few other "trees". Tell me when you think there's a forest - or, just keep skiing down the slopes.

[Cletus Miller]

Originally posted by Not Bob
[Kerik's nomination] also demonstrates the lack of comptetence of the staff in charge of the vetting process in the Bush Adminstration.

That's not fair to the folks with the vetting jobs--the problem was with the standards they were asked to apply, not their competence in applying them. Unless you have reason to suspect that Kerik (i) voted for Gore or Kerry, (ii) opposed the invasion of Iraq or (iii) was otherwise ideologically impure.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
Lobbying should be illegal. It's just that simple. It distorts what should be an intellectual debate.

How do you have a democracy if people can't petition the government about issues they care about? And it's a pretty fundamental fact of life that people will care more about issues where they have a vested stake than about issues where they don't but think they know what's best for the country.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
You are right. I've reported only one incident yesterday and one today. I should be more comprehensive in covering the last two days' news.

So, how about that Ernie Fletcher? I know he's just a governor from some flyover state, so maybe you don't care. So how about a governor from a big state reporting to prison? Of course, they're just governors, how about instead we look at a Republican Congressman taking bribes? Or a Republican Congressman resigning after a sex scandal? Of course, there's always the "sitting" Senator, whose name seems to come up when those lowlife state legislators engage in copycat activities - hey, if you can't emulate the great Senator and protector of American values, the scourge of Bill Clinton's sins, who can you emulate? (I know, I know, the answer is someone in the Bush administration - that Time report yesterday on how the watchdogs have been corrupted really kind of says it all, doesn't it?)

Well, those are just a few of the highlights of the lowlifes from the last couple of days. I really am sorry I'm not being more thorough, and can just hit a few low-lights. As I have time, I'll try to highlight a few other "trees". Tell me when you think there's a forest - or, just keep skiing down the slopes.

"last couple days"? are you serious? do you even read what you post? hint the date of the article is not the date of the "scandal" coming to light.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
No, not at all. Its a very clear point. The party is a disaster. An analogy to the Catholic Church is apt. The only reason its even viable is that the Dems are almost as bad, not so much from corruption (give them time once they're in power), but because they're beholden to a whole different crop of special interests.

Lobbying should be illegal. It's just that simple. It distorts what should be an intellectual debate. And there should be term limits across the board. If we continue to allow corporations to use DC as a feeding trough, we stifle innovation and subsidize dying industries. I'm being too general here, but you know what I mean. The current "privatization" looks a lot more like subsidization. I think over time this hurts both govt and corporations and is a huge factor in the wealth disparity issue.

Pelosi put a whole bunch of restrictions on lobbying and other anti-corruption stuff on her agenda for the first 100 hours, but most of it died in the Senate. Most but not all dems backed it, very few republicans crossed party lines to support it.

The first step here is the Rs admitting they have a problem. The second step is to do something about it. There's a narrow window before the Dems get too comfy where it's possible, but it will take a few Rs crossing the aisle. And at this point, the Republicans ought to back limits on lobbyist generosity out of self-interest now, anyways, since most of the payola will be heading to Democratic coffers in the next few years.

[SlaveNoMore]

Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
Yeh, yeh, yeh. He has a drinking problem and while he was splitting up with his wife slept with an attractive adult woman who worked for him and knew exactly what she was doing, but he didn't manage to violate any laws or even policies in the process. That's exactly like molesting teens under your care and your daughter's friends.

Exactly. The. Same. Thing.


(Hint - go back to Gerry Studds - the page may be taking down social security by now, but at least the teen page thing has some degree of comparability).

You're. Losing. Your. Mind.

Regards,

Slave

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
How do you have a democracy if people can't petition the government about issues they care about? And it's a pretty fundamental fact of life that people will care more about issues where they have a vested stake than about issues where they don't but think they know what's best for the country.

There should simply be no donations of any kind allowed. Nothing. At. All.

Senators should be paid $500k. House members should get $300k. That should be enough.

So yes, people could "lobby" the senators all day long, but never give them a red cent. Kill the incentive and you;ll kill the back room deals.

Yes. I know. I have to put this hookah down.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
There should simply be no donations of any kind allowed. Nothing. At. All.

Senators should be paid $500k. House members should get $300k. That should be enough.

So yes, people could "lobby" the senators all day long, but never give them a red cent. Kill the incentive and you;ll kill the back room deals.

Yes. I know. I have to put this hookah down.

They're not giving money to politicians (usually). They're giving money to organizations controlled by the politicians or their pals. Banning that sort of thing runs into massive First Amendment problems, not that I'm not sympathetic with the instinct.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
"last couple days"? are you serious? do you even read what you post? hint the date of the article is not the date of the "scandal" coming to light.

Like I said, those are the stories from the last couple of days.

Did I say something else?

How's the skiing?

[Diane_Keaton]

Appropros of nothing, and as odd as his look may be, I would love to become the next Mrs. Sarkozy. I'm working first on the FB to find the proper shoes (very important to the French). I would not mind being nekkid on a bear skin rug in front of a fireplace with that man raising his glass just like that. He's even charming when he's drunk.* I will be discardinig my freedom fries and hitting the French wine, cheese and champagne diet (works just as good as South Beach!!)

Just so we're clear, pooty store is open for the odd looking Sarkozy but is very much closed for the odd looking Kerik. A girl must have scruples.

**
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R5MPg01T3gE