Maybe to Alaskans, but to me he’ll forever be the “tubes” guy, and the guy screaming NO!! over and over on the Daily Show.
To me he will alway be the guy that implied his fellow Senators were insane for preventing the drilling in ANWR reserve.
The Tubes things is just an example of an Old Codger talking about something he should know better than to talk about. Humorous, but forgivable.
His bridge to nowhere is of course another gross example of Pork Barreling.
From my experience (working w/criminals), it’s a relative oddity that some one’s first criminal act comes so late in life, and when it does, there’s something specific driving it (massive depression due to spouse’s death, new addiction to prescription drugs, sudden loss of security from job, home or whatever).
Taking bribes (in this case free work done on vacation home etc.) seems clear he’s not looking for drug money, there’s no recent death, loss of security from job/home (though that might result from this). Reminds me most of the classic embezzler who steals from their employer 'cause they want nicer things in life than they currently can afford (except of course for the drug dependant). Known a number of folks like that, they simply thought they were ‘due’ these nice things.
and that just doesn’t happen suddenly near the end of life. I’d rather suspect that all along he’s gotten what he thought of as “perks”, free dinners, etc. It would be ‘beneath him’ to accept an envelop of money, but, his kid needs a car ya know? This is most likely the most egregious and easily provable of stuff.
That’s my suspicion anyhow. His own tone responding to the charges reminds me of the folks I’ve known. I recall catching some one in an embezzlement, told her she was suspended immediately w/o pay pending the results of an investigation into ‘banking irregularities’, she flounced out saying she knew she’d be vindicated.
I think that’s the only size brush Der Trihs has the dexterity to wield. If we take that away from him, he might not be able to post at al-- hmmm.
Never mind.
I believe you’re right. After so many years, there is a sense of entitlement with our elected officials, and they see nothing wrong with somebody doing gratis work for them or providing services. Ted is no pauper, but he’s not exactly wealthy, either. This level of graft is not going to make or break his retirement, so I’m sure he just accepted all this as his due. But he knows better.
I’m so happy you see my point. 
“Ignore the roasted babies in his fridge, or he’ll stop arranging the occasional blowjob for us.”
Funny how I never saw you as the resident idiot on this board until now.
I think the real question regarding the Stevens’ indictment is:
“How badly will this scandal hurt the presidential aspirations of Barack Obama?”
Discuss.
You made me choke on my lemonade, you bastard. 
The man was adept at bringing federal pork to his state, excuse me while I don’t quiver in awe.
Well, its his week. But we have backup ready from the usual gang, so not to worry.
But seriously folks…your question brings to mind the dilemma: who does a Senator serve first, his constituents or his country? Sen Stevens (R-Tammany) seems to have done rather well for Alaskans, and I’m not about to say they don’t deserve it. But he was rather extraordinarily fond of those of his constituents who owned lots of stuff. And a strong inclination to share.
Because bringing home the bacon has become so important to the election of our Congressgoons, we have come to accept that as a primary duty of office, when, properly considered, its no such thing. They are supposed to do their job for the country, if the money would be better spent elsewhere, it should be.
As an Alaskan, you may be well pleased with Sen Stevens. As an American, not so much.
In all fairness, Ted Stevens greatness consisted of spending 40 years delivering an unfair amount of federal dollars to a small population and being better at delivering pork to his supporters.
He may have been great for Alaska, but he really was one of the worst abusers of the Senate system in the country. Right on par with luminaries like Ted Kennedy. Again great for his state, but was he really looking after the best interests of the country.
Now you can say that was not his job, but I am still naive enough to want my Senators to not just try to grab the most pork barrels and the biggest share of the pie. I believe truly standout Senators do think about the US above the state that elected them.
I thought that was liberals. Oh yeah, I’m not on that message board. Oops.
Those other guys who don’t resemble me or my myopic narcissism are disgusting!
They failed miserably. The party they want does not exist any more. the neocons took it over and ran it into iceberg. Rove is the Repub party. Bush is the party. Stevens is the party.
No the party is fractured. Pay attention.
Dozens, in fact.
Suuuuure there is. I’ll believe that such people are more than an insignificant, irrelevant minority when I see their efforts have some effect.
You might not like it; you might even personally be working to oppose it. But it’s the “neocons, bigots, and warmongers” who matter. Who shape the party, control the party, represent the party, and are most of those who comprise it.
Of course there are decent conservatives out there. Conservatism in and of itself is not evil or stupid. The use of it and its adherents for evil and stupid actions is what I have a problem with. Decent conservatives and liberals alike support flawed candidates because they are “their sumbitch”, basically.
I for one am oddly comforted by this, as it suggests that the “little guy” can buy a politician too. Every American, not just the rich ones, should be able to successfully bribe a politician. It’s unconventional, but it’s one more way of leveling the playing field.