Oh for fuck’s sake. It was a little swipe at the party in power who, facing several ethical scandals and indictments, probably with more to come, are now moving to implement ethics. A “closing the barn door after the horse has stolen your tractor” kind of thread. If it makes you feel any better, I will cheerfully concede that there are politicians on every possible side of the aisle who are unethical. I just didn’t happen to see stories on the rest of them that day.
And it was Neil Bush who was a player in the S&L scandal. He later went on to work for a semi-conducter manufacturer despite having little knowledge of semi-conducters, and during a deposition given during his divorce expressed surprise that while on business trips for his employer Asian women would spontaneously show up at his hotel room and have sex with him.
1st: I am a liberal, so it’s not like I’m trying to smear Dems.
2nd: I took it from this SF Chronicle article. The Chron is pretty liberal, I would say.
Certainly the majority are Republicans, but Dems aren’t allergic to money, either.
Wow, nice way to misread things, shit for brains. I keep forgetting that I shouldn’t argue with witless fools. I can see why you’re “never married and probably never will be”. Women around the world will be breathing a huge sigh of relief on that news.
Never said they weren’t. “Linked to Abramoff”, in this article, though, means “Took money from some of the same people who gave money to Abramoff”, not “Took money from Abramoff.”
I’m not saying that the little ethics policy shuffle the Pubs are trying to pull off is legit, and I’m not saying they shouldn’t be called on it. I’m saying that as Democrats, we can’t point fingers and expect Republicans to call their leaders on the bullshit if we’re not willing to do the same thing. If Tom Daschle and Harry Reid took money and favors from Abramoff, either directly or laundered, they should be held accountable for doing so. As should every member of congress, regardless of party affilliation, who did so.
The Dems who received money got the money from the tribes themselves. They are allowed to make campaign contributions to whoever they wish.
Abramoff gave no money to a democrat.
Just as an aside.
Didn’t the republicans come into power saying they would clean up the corrupution in the congress?
Kind of like in 1992 when we heard the WH would be the most ethical administration in history. Rolleyes indeed.
By the way, even golden boy Harry Reid is apologizing for trying to make it so political.
Nice to see how “Ending the politics of personal destruction” is still in play. Now if we can just get a playbook on when and how these cute soundbites actually apply. It’s all well and good to apologize, but I think most of us know that the accusation is more often remembered than the retraction. Once it hits the press, the backtrack is often forgotten.
And yes, both sides are guilty. It’s funny, though, that around here certain paties are always guilty, and the other always forgiven.
False equivalence again, duffer. All the evidence indicates that the Republicans are one hell of a lot more guilty than the Dems. Abramov was a huge Republican partisan , it’s little wonder he’d use the watering can on his fave party rather than sprinkle it around equally. Saying both sides are guilty is like saying both sides scored in a 42-7 route. Yeah, it’s technically true, but it’s deeply misleading.
So guilt only applies if the other side is more guilty? As long as the other side scores more points, your team didn’t play? Got it. Thanks for the clarification.
What a minute. You are the smartass. You are that stupid. You believe that if you have 50 guilty guys on one side and two on the other side. They are equal.
There were four hours between this post and the one directly above it (mine). You didn’t read it before you posted this?
Agreed. And I think the harsher resolutions put forth by Pelosi should be put into place. The vague peice of pap put forward originally by the Republicans was damage control. I can’t believe anyone here would deny that.