November 29, 2005
GOP For Sale/ Buy The Illusion
The party that has tied itself to God, The Church and Morality, takes another ethics hit today.
Maybe the GOP and it’s supporters are more ethically challenged than they portray themselves.
Maybe their moral superiority is an illusion bought by those who support them and sold to get elected.
Here are a few minor indiscretions from the GOP and our current Republican administration.
"SAN DIEGO - California U.S. Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham has resigned after admitting taking $2.4 million in bribes to steer defense contracts to conspirators."
"YESTERDAY'S indictment of House Majority Leader Tom DeLay on charges of conspiring to violate Texas campaign finance laws won't come as a surprise to anyone who's watched the Texas Republican operate over the years. In his drive to consolidate Republican power, Mr. DeLay has consistently pushed, and at times stepped over, ethical boundaries."
" Gov. John G. Rowland announced his resignation Monday amid a months-long cascade of graft allegations, a federal investigation and a rapidly gathering drive to impeach him for accepting gifts from friends and businessmen."
"Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist is facing questions from the Justice Department and the Securities and Exchange Commission about his sale of stock in his family's hospital company one month before its price fell sharply."
"A disastrous investment by the state in rare coins has erupted into both a financial and political scandal, with Ohio's Republicans running for cover and the Democrats seeing great opportunity."
"A second Time magazine reporter has agreed to cooperate in the CIA leak case and will testify about her discussions with Karl Rove's attorney, a sign that prosecutors are still exploring charges against the White House aide. ... in the case"
"Vice President Dick Cheney's top aide was indicted today on perjury, false statement, and obstruction of justice charges in connection with a special counsel's probe into the leaking of a CIA officer's identity.
"Over the past year, Vice President Cheney has waged an intense and largely unpublicized campaign to stop Congress, the Pentagon and the State Department from imposing more restrictive rules on the handling of terrorist suspects, according to defense, state, intelligence and congressional officials."
"WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The Supreme Court has agreed to hear Vice President Dick Cheney's challenge to a court ruling that would force him to disclose details of meetings between his energy policy task force and the industry. "
"immediately before becoming Vice-President, as chief executive of Halliburton, the world’s largest oil-and-gas-services company. The conglomerate, which is based in Houston, is now the biggest private contractor for American forces in Iraq; it has received contracts worth some eleven billion dollars for its work there."
"WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The FBI has made a formal request to interview the Army Corps of Engineers chief contracting officer who has alleged her agency unfairly awarded no-bid contracts worth billions of dollars to a Halliburton subsidiary for work in Iraq, law enforcement sources said Thursday.
"From 2001 to 2003, Republican staffers on the Senate Judiciary Committee illicitly accessed nearly 5,000 computer files containing confidential Democratic strategy memos about President Bush's judicial nominees. The GOP used the memos to shape their own plans and leaked some to the media. "
"In 2003, Halliburton overcharged the army for fuel in Iraq. Specifically, Halliburton's subsidiary Kellogg, Brown & Root hired a Kuwaiti company, Altanmia, to supply fuel at about twice the going rate, then added a markup, for an overcharge of at least $61 million, according to a December 2003 Pentagon audit.
"An international consortium of companies, including Halliburton, is alleged to have paid more than $100 million in bribes to Nigerian officials, from 1995 to 2002, to facilitate a natural-gas-plant deal. (Cheney was Halliburton's CEO from 1995 to 2000.)"
"Before the United Nations' vote on the Iraq war, the United States and Great Britain developed an eavesdropping operation targeting diplomats from several countries. "
"According to former Rep. Nick Smith (R-Mich.), on Nov. 21, 2003, with the vote on the administration's Medicare bill hanging in the balance, someone offered to contribute $100,000 to his son's forthcoming congressional campaign, if Smith would support the bill."
"In September 2004, the House Ethics Committee concluded an inquiry by fingering House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Texas), saying he deserved "public admonishment" for offering to endorse Smith's son in return for Smith's vote. DeLay has claimed Smith initiated talks about a quid pro quo. The matter of the $100,000 is unresolved; soon after his original allegations, Smith suddenly claimed he had not been offered any money. Smith's son Brad lost his GOP primary in August 2004."
"In May 2003, DeLay's office persuaded the Federal Aviation Administration to find the plane carrying a Texas Democratic legislator, who was leaving the state in an attempt to thwart the GOP's nearly unprecedented congressional redistricting plan. "
"DeLay appeared at a golf fundraiser that Westar Energy held for one of his political action committees, Americans for a Republican Majority, while energy legislation was pending in the House. "
"To promote its Medicare bill, the Bush administration produced imitation news-report videos touting the legislation.
"Thomas Scully, Medicare's former administrator, supposedly threatened to fire chief Medicare actuary Richard Foster to prevent him from disclosing the true cost of the 2003 Medicare bill. "
"Government Accountability Office recommended Scully return half his salary from 2003. Inevitably, Scully is now a lobbyist for drug companies helped by the bill."
"The Department of Education paid conservative commentator Armstrong Williams $240,000 to promote its educational law, No Child Left Behind.
"In early 2001, chief White House political strategist Karl Rove held meetings with numerous companies while maintaining six-figure holdings of their stock -- including Intel, whose executives were seeking government approval of a merger. "
These are the god-fearing, morally superior "Good Christians" that the people of the United States want to believe are the "good-guys."
Like Jerry Falwell and Pat Roberts, they honestly think that if they invoke the name of God or Jesus, that makes them look spiritual. They hope that that facade is enough to keep you from seeing that they are just snake oil salesmen. They pretend to be the party of the people, when in fact, they are the party of the wealthy. They pretend to be morally superior, when they are morally bankrupt.
The facade is so important to them that they would deny our soldiers the right to speak freely during a staged interview with the president. They can be sent to die but cannot be trusted to say the right thing because the illusion of goodness takes precedence over showing them a little respect.
The Republican party is corrupt, the Democratic party may be weak but to paint yourselves as the shining lights in this dark world, all the while being a main contributor to the darkness, is the epitome of hypocrisy.
The Republican facade of being god-fearing and morally superior is getting tougher to sell.
Andre
You are mixing real charges with inuendo and suppostions.
To cut fog, if a person is guilty of a crime he should be punished. It is easy to claim people have commmitted a crime. We have a legal system to determine that. Most of the things you mention have not held up in that legal system or have not been decided yet.
As for Mr. Cunningham, he says “The truth is I broke the law, concealed my conduct, and disgraced my office”. He could get up to 10 years in jail. That is just.
The deep trough of the government has corrupted many people. That is why government should be kept small. We can think of many Dems who also fell. (Wright and Rostenkowski leap to mind). When we catch them, they are punished.
They are Republicans. What do you expect?
Posted by: Aldous at November 29, 2005 02:29 PMSpeaking of scandals, check this out.
Posted by: sanger at November 29, 2005 03:01 PMSanger,
“current” scandals. This administration. The leaders that our running our country now.
Posted by: Andre M. Hernandez at November 29, 2005 03:34 PMAndre
Geez..Can you answer a question then?
Why are the polls showing that Democrats in Congress less popular than Bush or the Republicans in Congress?
Just wondering..
Posted by: sicilianeagle at November 29, 2005 03:48 PMWhy are the polls showing that Democrats in Congress less popular than Bush or the Republicans in Congress?
Because there are far more biased media outlets that favor Republicans.
Posted by: Schwamp at November 29, 2005 03:58 PMSchwamp said:
Because there are far more biased media outlets that favor Republicans.
Are you living in the same country I am? One merely needs to look at the editorial pages of the top five newspapers in this country to determine their political bias toward the left. CNN, ABC, NBC and don’t forget our favorite Bush-hating CBS, all tend to lean leftward.
Polls about Democratic or Republican approval ratings are about as useful as a screen door on a submarine. The fact of the matter remains, power corrupts, always has, always will. Only by bringing corruption to light will we prevent it.
Current scandals are nothing new. Take this from the Washington Post today:
Members of Congress, lawyers and pollsters recognize that both events taken together could signal the start of a cyclical ritual in the nation’s capital: the moment when lawmakers and outsiders are widely seen as getting too cozy with each other and face a public backlash — and legal repercussions — as a result.“I’ve been in town for 30 years, and it seems that every 10 years or so there is an episode of this type,” said Jan W. Baran, a Republican ethics lawyer at Wiley Rein & Fielding. “We clearly are at that period now.”
“It’s gotten to a level that it can’t be ignored anymore,” agreed Stanley M. Brand, a criminal defense lawyer at Brand & Frulla who used to work for Democrats in Congress.
I have been in DC for almost 16 years, this is truly cyclical.
Posted by: Matt Johnston at November 29, 2005 04:13 PMAndre, about half of these “current scandals” you mention involving the administration don’t involve the administration at all.
You’ve got a list there that includes everything from house representatives and senators to state governors to junior congressional staffers and the Ohio Republican party. If you’re going to cast the net that broadly, you could have come up with thousands if not tens of thousands more “scandals” which effect either party. Especially since innuendo and selected quotes which say nothing more than somebody somewhere disagreed with something consitutes a “scandal” in your book.
But what’s worse is that many of them aren’t scandals at all but policy disputes.
DeLay appeared a fundraiser for his own action comittee sponsored by an energy company while energy legistlation was pending in the House? That consitutes a scandal how? If that’s a scandal, then every member of goverment is involved in similar scandals. I guess it would be a scandal, in your view, for a politician to give a fundraising speech before a police union or a civil rights organization since law enforcement and civil rights legislation routinely comes before the House.
Also, the way you spin these so called scandals is utterly absurd. These people you’re accusing all talk about Jesus, God, and their own superior morality?
I’d be interested to see some of these quotes where Halliburton officials, the Army Corps of Engineers chief and former governor Rowland have expressed their deep devotion to Jesus and God. I honestly don’t know how you’re dreaming all this up or what point you think you’re making.
Posted by: sanger at November 29, 2005 04:20 PMSanger,
When did the word liberal become synonymous with Democrat? And when did thw word liberal become synonymous with immoral?
And why do most of the champions of “moral values” have such a poor record when is comes to their own home life? Case in point Newt, what a pig!!!
Posted by: Earjoy at November 29, 2005 04:25 PMAndre, the Rpblcns you are talking about make the laws for other people to obey. They believe that they are the “elect” and above the law. The religions that they subscribe to are nothing more than organized hate groups.
Posted by: ray at November 29, 2005 04:28 PMSanger,
The post says quite clearly GOP, not just this administration.
Conflict of interest is different from policy dispute.
The far right “Christians” are the voting base of the GOP.
Posted by: Andre M. Hernandez at November 29, 2005 04:32 PMSanger,When did the word liberal become synonymous with Democrat? And when did thw word liberal become synonymous with immoral?
Did anybody say that? I sure didn’t.
And Ray, Democrats or anyone in goverment don’t make laws that others have to obey? The assumption you’re making about the “religions” Republicans subscribe to is pretty intersting. These religions are “organized hate groups?” Really?
What religions are those, I wonder? Do Democrats by and large in this country have different religions than Republicans, and if so what are they?
Sanger,
You may not have said it expressly but the name of the link you used said it all, BoycottLiberals.com and then went on to exclusively discuss the sins of Democrat politicians.
The Republicans can throw mud at everyone so easily because they’re sitting in the middle of the mud puddle.
Posted by: Earjoy at November 29, 2005 04:45 PMSicilianeagle,
How was your thanks giving?
“Why are the polls showing that Democrats in Congress less popular than Bush or the Republicans in Congress?
Why is it that the polls suck unless they favor our opinions?
1) I don’t know this to be true.
2) Democrats are less likely to tow the party line
so therefore we’re more likely to speak out
against our own party unlike the Republicans
who march lockstep with the government no
matter what.
Liberal’s,
The ILLUSION is in YOUR mirror.
It is DENIAL.
Sicilianeagle,
“Why are the polls showing that Democrats in Congress less popular than Bush or the Republicans in Congress?”
Where are you getting your poll numbers? Fox News? My response to a similar charge on the dark side:
The latest Republican job approval ratings in congress, looking at several polls, ranges from a low of 27% (The Harris Poll, Nov. 8-13, 2005) to a high of 38% (CNN/USA Today/Gallup Poll, Oct. 21-23, 2005.)Posted by: JayJay Snowman at November 29, 2005 05:59 PMThe same polls shows the job approval rating for Democrats in congress ranges from a low of 25% (The Harris Poll, Nov. 8-13, 2005.) to a high of 41% (CNN/USA Today/Gallup Poll, Oct. 21-23, 2005.)
All other poll results fall somewhere in-between these ranges. As you can see there is not much difference between the job approval ratings. But it is important to consider the reasons for these low numbers by party. I do not think they are the same.
In my opinion the Republican’s numbers are an indicator of how people feel about what they have done. The Democrats numbers are an indicator of how people feel about what they have not done. The Democrats were elected as the opposition party, yet they have remained fairly silent up until now. The reasons for this, imo, are because of the high level of patriotism that was expected after 9/11. Even today when the Democrats voice opposition to the war in Iraq, they are called unpatriotic. I disapproved of the Democrats in congress because they did little to oppose bad ideas coming from the Republicans. This has finally started to change.
What I think you are going to see is that as Democrats start to become more vocal and develop alternative plans, that the poll numbers will swing favorably to Democrats.
When asked the question; if the 2006 election were held today would you vote for a Democrat or Republican?, the poll numbers unanimously favor Democrats. The gap ranges from as low as 6% points (GWU Battleground LV 10/9-12/05) to as high as 17% points. (Newsweek RV 11/10-11/05)
This is telling because the Republicans are in control of congress and even though the approval ratings for both sides are low, the message is that people want a change. This is the time that the Democrats need to come forward and offer such change.
THEY ALL SUCK!
Vote them out… or shut up about it. People are still bitching about the politicians ‘on the other side.’ It’s very simple - either they are honest and on our (average person’s) side or they are not. I am exhausted of party loyalty over fair and honest representation.
First - vote all incumbents out of office. If a few good eggs go out with the bad, well they were all living in the same bed… sorry, but out they go. Let them know that parties do not run the country, people do (OK- being a little naive here…)
Posted by: tony at November 29, 2005 06:31 PMFirst - vote all incumbents out of office. If a few good eggs go out with the bad, well they were all living in the same bed… sorry, but out they go. Let them know that parties do not run the country, people do (OK- being a little naive here…)
==============
I couldn’t agree more.
Posted by: tree hugger at November 29, 2005 06:37 PMSicilianeagle,
I apologize, you apparently didn’t get your poll numbers from Fox News:
FOX News/Opinion Dynamics Poll. Sept. 27-28, 2005. N=900 registered voters nationwide. MoE ± 3 (for all registered voters). “Do you think it would be better for the country if Republicans or Democrats win next year’s congressional elections?”Posted by: JayJay Snowman at November 29, 2005 07:11 PMRepublicans 32%
Democrats 40%
No Differ-
ence/Neither 18%
Unsure 10%
Sanger:
I’ve been reading this blog for a while, however, this is the first time I’ve posted a comment.
Your comment…
” Speaking of scandals, check this out.
Posted by: sanger at November 29, 2005 03:01 PM “
… is slightly outdated. I read the whole page on the link. Of the entries that are dated (which some aren’t) there is only ONE that happened on this decade.
The instances that Andre has quoted have ALL happened recently.
Besides, I think you missed the point. It isn’t so much about WHAT they did (altough I must admit it’s deplorable) it’s about the fact they try to hide what they do behind a moral Christian mask and don’t really show the People (US) who they really are.
Andre: Correct me if I’m wrong, but that was the point you were trying to make, right?
Posted by: Elise at November 29, 2005 07:39 PMNicely done, Andre. These righties can try to run from it all they like, but obviously they aren’t fooling anyone any longer.
Posted by: Adrienne at November 29, 2005 07:45 PMDespite countless attempts by Democrats no proof of wrongdoing by Delay, Frist or Rove has been established. Vice Pres Cheney didnt do anything illegal one of his subordiants did. Halliburton got the same no bid contracts under Pres Clinton as under Bush. So all you have is a handful of minor politicians who have broken the law who happen to be Republicans.
Bill and Hillary have commited more fellony’s then everything on your list combined. I am proud of the Democratic party for finnaly deciding that purgery was wrong(it took long enough). So how do you feel about Hillary(who has obstructed justice, hidden evidence, lied to investigaters, commited investment fraud, been party to purgery and stolen from the White House)
being your probible candidate for President?
Hi Kelly,
Aren’t you doing the exact same thing you accuse Democrats of doing?
Posted by: JayJay Snowman at November 29, 2005 08:17 PMTony,
They do ALL suck. It would do little good to replace a bad egg with another bad egg. People need to seriously consider third party candidates. I haven’t seen many ideas from Democrats, and I’ve only seen bad ideas from Republicans. IMO, the party that has the ideas that have impressed me the most is the Libertarian party.
Posted by: JayJay Snowman at November 29, 2005 08:27 PMThe main difference between this enormously long list that I linked to and Andre’s list is that over half of what’s on my list mentions actual convictions for crimes, and Andre’s list doesn’t mention even one conviction. Not one.
Some of the items on Andre’s list, especially those couple of guys who basically admitted taking bribes, could end up convicted and perhaps even have been, but if so Andre doesn’t tell us. And who are some of these people anyway?
Rowland? Wasn’t he a left-leaning Republican governor of the deep blue state of Connecticut? I’ve barely heard of him.
I admit that much of what’s on the list I gave is old and the site doesn’t seem to have been updated in a while (though much of what’s on Andre’s is hardly fresh news either).
I guess I could compile a list like Andre’s of “Democratic scandals” but I just don’t feel like going through all the headlines over the past year and selectively cutting and pasting every single item that might, materially or through innuendo, cast a Democrat in a bad light. What would be the point?
Does anybody believe that all Republicans or all Democrats are angels?
Any of us could do what Andre has done about any political party and frankly come up with lists ten times as long as Andre’s once we’ve mastered cutting and pasting.
Posted by: sanger at November 29, 2005 10:47 PMGood post Andre.
Is anyone really surprised by the occassional congress person that gets caught?
That’s just the tip of the ice-berg.
We don’t even see that biggest part of the corruption. We know it’s there, but everyone looks the other way.
Government, as a whole is corrupt, irresponsible, and unaccountable.
But, it’s our own fault because we keep re-electing the same corrupt, bought-and-paid-for crooks into office every election.
And, watch Tom Delay and Cunningham get presidential pardons, like the 140 felons that Clinton pardoned.
It’s a hell of a system. Why be responsible when you can be irresponsible, get rich, and even get a multi-million dollar pen$ion paid for by the tax payers. Congress is FOR SALE. They don’t answer to the people. They answer to their big-money-donor-puppeteers, spend all their time gettin’ theirs, raisin’ money, votin’ on pork-barrel and graft, and continue to ignore our many pressing problems.
What voters don’t realize is that they allow themselves to be divided up into groups, numerous parties, that prevent a majority from ever existing to oust the incumbents who enjoy a 95% re-election rate. Third parties (by themsevles) don’t stand a chance. But, what if all third parties united to educate voters, and encourage them to vote non-incumbent?
Posted by: d.a.n at November 29, 2005 11:41 PM“Why are the polls showing that Democrats in Congress less popular than Bush or the Republicans in Congress”?
Possibly a successful marketing scam pandered to those Americans too fucking stupid to do anything to inform themselves other than sit in front of a televison like a flock of mindless sheep.
Well, as a matter of fact, anyone involved in politics is a far cry from being an angel…
They may the best of intentions going in, but in the end, politics is politics.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m a Democrat, but I’m also a realist. Politicians make decisions that affect the lives of all of us and you can’t please everybody. Politicians are going to make mistakes and there’s going to be people who disagree with their decisions.
However, there are different degrees of mistakes and disagreement. There are some mistakes I can just say, “Well THAT was a stupid thing to do” to and there are some that I need to voice concern about.
Some examples listed on the link Sanger provided really aren’t my business. They do not affect my Political leader’s ability to lead; they just make them not very smart and quite sad morally. But there is a difference between bad judgment that affects the Politician personally and bad judgment that affects their constituents AKA the whole Nation. There is a difference between a politician driving drunk, or hiring a prostitute, or cheating on their wife with an intern and:
a) Taking the Country to War in the name of “The war on Terrorism” when Iraq NEVER terrorized. Go after the REAL terrorists. Go after Al Quaida and OBL.
b) Limiting Civil Rights such as Free Speech. (Check out the ACLU’s website for information regarding what EXACTLY the Patriot Act gives the government the right to do YOU, just a regular citizen, with no reason or court warrant)
c) Leading the Country based Religious convictions not shared by the ENTIRE Country. In essence trying to make the whole Country turn to Christianity. Pushing ideas such as “Intelligent Design” and not funding any organization that is Pro-Choice.
So, to answer your question, NO. Politicians, regardless of what party they are from aren’t angels. The difference is the severity of the mistakes they make and how WE are (or aren’t) willing to look the other way.
Great post d.a.n.,
What really strikes me is the lobbying positions they (congress persons & admin. cabinet members) get in many cases replete with enormous stock options. Corporations do rule our nation, make our decisions and support the two parties. Washington is a whorish shill of the corporate dollar and it hurts to state the obvious. Campaign finance reform was fraught with loopholes and did nothing but to mask the problems further.
Yes both sides have corruption, it’s endemic and always has been. Johnson and Kennedy skimming money off of weapons contractors and military industrial contractors. It’s old and it really calls for action but in a two party system and where third parties really DO NOT HAVE A REASONABLE or VIABLE FOREIGN AFFAIRS PLATFORM (hint hint get on the ball third party people) where do we in fact turn but the lesser of two corruptions.
One new party that I have been looking into is the libertarian left and much of the information coming out of The Cato Institute. It really isn’t the Lew Rockwell childish prattle most are familiar with hearing from the libertarians. this appears to be a new breed with more of a responsible basis. Although imperfect we need more than just what we are offered as well as have a reallistic view or grasp on foreign affairs (Which appears to be the libertarian lefts vantage point over most third parties, sorry Greens and Lew Rockwell-ites)
We really need a new option. Until then I stay a Dem.
Novenge,
You are so right about corporations.
It’s actually money.
Those that own or run corporations have money, and some abuse it to control government.
Have you read “Confessions of an Economic Hit Man” ?
Want to stay a Dem? OK. How about voting non-incumbent thought ? That’s the only tool voters have to get the attention of politicians, because they don’t want to lose their higly coveted, cu$hy, & prized seats.
Posted by: d.a.n at November 30, 2005 08:22 AMSanger,
“Any of us could do what Andre has done about any political party and frankly come up with lists ten times as long as Andre’s once we’ve mastered cutting and pasting.”
Then do it.
The reason that I have had to do alot of cutting and pasting is because there are so many different news sources that cover so many Republican screw-ups and scandals, that I don’t need to write rhetorical nonsense based on one persons word or something I heard at the water cooler, or some made up spin from a bias right-wing commentator. I leave that to you.
I’ll stick to cutting and pasting actual headlines or pieces of real stories to back my opinions.
So do it. I challenge you. Make your list. Tens times longer. I for one will be impressed. I’ll settle for half as long.
Elise,
“it’s about the fact they try to hide what they do behind a moral Christian mask and don’t really show the People (US) who they really are.”
I could not have said it better myself. Thanks for getting it.
Adrienne,
Thanks.
There is certainly substance to many of the scandals that are listed, but often the implications go farther than that.
A good example is the Abramoff scandal. There are lawmakers being implicated for things that are normal politicking and not illegal at all. Just because someone donates money to a particular candidate or organization does not necessarily mean that there was anything illicit going on. Yet, these situations often get lumped in as being proof-positive that it’s all just more bad news.
The truth is that donations are given and lobbyists try to push their influence, most often legally in both cases.
This situation with Dorgan is a good case in point. It’s highly likely that what he did in writing letters recommending certain actions on behalf of tribes was truly legit. Yet, because some donation was made somewhere, he is being implicated in the whole Abramoff situation.
There are most likely republicans who are not guilty of any wrong-doing who are likewise being implicated by the press, simply because of association.
The media feeding frenzy in these situations usually cause much more damage to innocent people than should ever happen. If they were really doing their job, they would refrain from mentioning inuendo and rumors at all, regardless of whatever caviats they might offer in their offerings.
I’m a Democrat, and I am highly incensed about the corruption in our government; on both sides of the aisle. I’m also incensed over the collateral damage which occurs from the media machine. Hyperbole is commonly used in place of more accurate terminology and we all suffer for that.
Sanger’s link to the website listing Democratic evils is probably a reverse-mirror image of another website that is out there about the Republicans. If you want to look for it; it’s there. The point is, it’s a skewed perspective, and that is what is being presented in the media today from both sides.
Let’s stick to truth and objectivity and get ALL of these crooks out of Washington. Maybe the baby has been in the bathwater for so long that it should be thrown out, too. Let’s get rid of all of them, good or bad, and start over with a clean batch.
sanger, “speaking of scandals”, why does that strange list include so many instances of people having sex. Sex is good. It’s how we all got here, and I’m certainly in favor of it.
What religions are those, I wonder?
How about Falwell, Robertson, and the “churches” that set up the original segregation academies in Virginia. They even tried to end compulsory public education in several states. That what I call organized hate groups.
Despite countless attempts by Democrats no proof of wrongdoing by Delay, Frist or Rove has been established. Vice Pres Cheney didnt do anything illegal one of his subordiants did. Halliburton got the same no bid contracts under Pres Clinton as under Bush. So all you have is a handful of minor politicians who have broken the law who happen to be Republicans. Bill and Hillary have commited more fellony’s then everything on your list combined. I am proud of the Democratic party for finnaly deciding that purgery was wrong(it took long enough). So how do you feel about Hillary() being your probible candidate for President?
Posted by: kelly at November 29, 2005 08:05 PM
Kelly;
Would you please site some sources for your so called facts: When was Hillary ever even charged with these crimes,(who has obstructed justice, hidden evidence, lied to investigaters, commited investment fraud, been party to purgery and stolen from the White House) Remember you are not under oath here but guilt by association has no point in law. Who just resigned yesterday, For lying and accepting bribes in exchange for his vote Oh I know the GOP congressional representative representing the needs of his GREED all over Washington DC, Instead of his constituents, It was NOT Sen Hillary Clinton DEM NY, was it?
Oh, By the way didn’t we get a bargain when $42MILLION was spent by Kenneth Starr, just to prove that yes President Clinton did technically have sex, …with that woman,…..Monica Lewinsky. Least it finally came out, yeah that was worth the $42Million spent, I know I was overjoyed with how my taxdollars were being spent to find out that Technically, A blow job is a sex act. That question had perplexed me to no end but it took the GOP and their Crack(head) legal team ONLY $42Million dollars to find that information out when they could have gone to any street corner in the DC area and found the same information out for about $50. while saving $41,999,950, of the public’s hard earned tax dollars. Gee, I know that I sure sleep better at night, knowing that The GOP’s in charge of my tax dollars, Don’t You, Kelly?
I for one would be VERY Proud to Call Hillary Clinton, President of The United States of America. And I am sure that I am Definately not alone.
As Always,
Wayne
Ray, if you think that things like soliciting sex from a minor, statutory rape and picking up prostitutes is all just good normal sexual activity, then I’ll let you just keep on thinking that. It’s no wonder, I guess, that so many Democratic leaders have ended up in jail. Democrtats just don’t see anything wrong with these activities.
Posted by: sanger at December 1, 2005 12:12 AM Well , I hate to bust you alls bubble but they don’t make a honest politician.
Dems / Rep its just a matter of time til they get caught.
sanger:
I realize that your arguement with ray, is just that Your arguement, But I can not help but find it funny that the while THE GOP focuses on the sex lives of Democrats they should actually be looking in their own mirrors to see what heinous crimes the Repugnicans are commiting on their behalf or are both the Senate & House Ethics Commitees getting it wrong?
BTW…I would think the GOP would be all for legalizing prostitution…Commerce at its Finest, Purest form. Who could argue against Capitalism?
After all, The supply meets the demand, otherwise like any other business if there (was not a demand) there would be no (business) Prostitutes. Prostitution actually stimulates the economy, the deviants seek their services, the Prostitutes provide services the customers obviously want or need. It also provides you and those like you a hobby, worrying about what those of us who have a life, are doing! And that leads me to this what exactly is statuatory rape? The older partner is over 21 and the younger is 14, I agree, The older partner should be put through the prison system and let the cons deal with them. However, if you are talking about the Kids down the street who happen to be 18 and 16.5, and have been together for the last couple of years and it is obviously consensual, I say No Way does that Constitue Rape, statutory or otherwise. This is simply 2 kids who are experiencing what nature intended them to, Lust, Love, and Desire, and should not be prosecuted at all.
I DO NOT SUPPORT ANY SEXUAL CONTACT/ACTIVITIES BETWEEN ADULTS AND MINORS AT ALL AT ANY LOCATION NO MATTER WHAT!
As Always,
Wayne
Wayne,
I am a god-fearin, lifetime member of the GOP. I liken myself to the likes of forward-thinkin folks like Pat Buchanon and Jerry Fallwel.
I do not appreciate the mentioning of fornication of any type. We far right “Christian fundamentalist feel that sex is dirty. The human form is dirty. words like lust,desire and love are dirty. Especially if these feelings are being experienced by others who are not like us.
I would appreciate you not discussing topics as vile and disgusting as human sexuality again.
I hope that I have appeared morally superior in my condemnation of your potty-mouth. I hope that I appear to be superior enough to convince you that if you do not subscribe to my beliefs you will burn in hell.
God Bless.
