Posted on 01/05/2006 8:14:44 AM PST by Liz
You can almost smell the fear in Washington that America's mood is racing toward "throw the bums out" — and a yearning for fresh, clean faces in politics.
The revolting Jack Abramoff lobbying scandal with millions shamelessly tossed around to promote Indian gaming is tainting everyone in Washington...49%of Americans now think Congress is corrupt.
It's bad news for lots of Republicans because it's the Republican red states that always have the greatest skepticism about big government and influence-peddling.
But it could also be bad news for Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.). Tales of influence-peddling bring to mind Clinton-era scandals like fat-cat sleepovers in the Lincoln bedroom at the White House.
It's good news for Virginia Gov. Mark Warner (D) as a fresh face for 2008 and someone with few links to Washington. It could also be good news for Mr. Reformer, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), who's pushing a bill to restrict lobbying.
Democrats would like to paint the Abramoff mess as a Republican scandal, but Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid got plenty of Abramoff-linked money.
But what the Abramoff mess will really do is raise questions about the way Congress operates, especially the practice of "earmarks," which has become institutionalized under Republican control.
The result is that federal agencies are forced to accept earmarks of big-bucks spending for programs they don't want, with contractors they don't favor, because a lawmaker stuck it into a bill in the dead of night. Republicans, as the party controlling Congress, get most earmarks, but Democrats get some, too.
That's why Dem leaders are reluctant to rap earmarks. Now reporters across America are going to start combing through campaign contributions across the board — not just from Indian tribes — and hunt down votes that look like quid pro quos.
It won't be pretty.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
It is. Every time the dems open a new door, their own sins rush in to bite them in the a$$. They deserve it.
2006 will be a year where the righteous will be well rewarded with blessings, but the sinful will feel the wrath more than ever before, and it will be world wide. It's about time.
For years, there's been a push toward Socialism/Communism in the world. Where there is force, there is an equal and opposing force. The more force is used, the more resistance or inertia there is. Even with the simple ion, the good wins out over the evil every time.
I see the good in this world having a great year. 2006 will suck for the dems.
"I just know there used to be a time in this country when the average Joe would not put up with this crap."
I think that is one of our major problems. I don't think the average Joe is any more willing to put up with this today. It's just that the average Joe thinks he can't do anything about it. I think most of us are disgusted, but feel we are fighting against too many ignorant voters who will just continue to vote for a familiar name (incumbent) or a straight party ticket.
Also, think about how you would feel voting if your choice is the corrupt Republican incumbent or the Democrat challenger? Better the devil you know than the devil you don't know? How do you suppose the Democrats feel when the situation is reversed? Don't you imagine that is how Kennedy and Kerry keep getting re-elected?
How do we fix this?
(devolve, did a lateral move, needs to be posted here.)
DEVOLVE POSTED: I recall that the whole Klintoon family were given free luxury lavish trips, free luxury housing, free meals and entertainment as well - one great example is their long freevie stays with millionaire democrats at their Cape Cod mansions that would have cost a fortune to rent for just one week. Why were Slick Willie and Hillary and Chelsea allowed to accept incredibly huge gifts and perks while those in Congress are under the gun for doing only a fraction of the same - if at all.
Is this a case of the Klintoon Royal Family being immune and exempt from the FEC rules and CFR?
I see in a current FR thread that the Hillary Clinton and her US Senate campaign were just allowed to "skate" with a tiny $30,000 fine accessed by the FEC and OK'ed the the NYS Senate for illegally failing to report campaign contributions "in excess of $750,000" by Peter Paul.
Some animals are just "more equal than others"?
Term limits. Politicians get too comfortable.
This story is about two days from becoming Inside Baseball, and nobody outside the Beltway is going to give a hoot.
We stop it by finding people in every state, who are currently political nobodies but are willing to run for office, and using the power of grassroots organizations like FreeRepublic to get them elected. I am willing to run in my state if I can get the support. I have no scandals in my background, and will be eligible for every office in the land as of this April. I pledge to run for reelection only once, and will serve (but not actively run) a third term if you really like what I'm doing, but then I'm done. I'll be kingmaker for someone to follow me with the same convictions as I have so we can continue to have honest representatives for at least my term(s) and my successor's first term.
It won't be pretty.
It'll happen for pubs only. The liberal scum will be ignored.
Yeah, lets get rid of all those liberal bums and get some fresh faced Republican younguns in there!
Ok, you've got my vote!
In addition, I'd suggest some sort of REAL campaign finance reform. I don't know much about this topic, but it seems to me that a lot of the problem stems from $, $, and $.
If the only way someone can get elected is by amassing a huge campaign chest, then this encourages those who wil bend or break the rules to do so.
And if the perqs of the job/retirement are so attractive, then it encourages cheating to keep the job.
And if the bribes and gifts are so attractive, then it encourages bad decisions on the job.
If I were king, I'd consider banning ALL campaign contributions. I'd require that the media NOT cover campaigns, but instead give equal time to each candidate to write/say what they see fit. Each candidate could have a website to put out any message they felt was appropriate. (Of course if I were king, we wouldn't need any candidates, would we, because I'd be running everything!)
"throw the bums out"
I like that!
I like the sound of that!
"throw the bums out"
Unfortunately true----but Dims are the originators of this scam.
McCain's Campaign reform bill allows the American Indians to donate twice as much money to politicians than other nationalities. Guess who gets the largest amount of American Indian dollars. Why...."The Maverick" John McCain.
His bill was a kick back to the American Indians - giving them exclusive rights to speak out through campaign dollars for their interests more than any other Americans. They "bought" his favor!
Indians are exempt from the McCain bill. They donate heavily to McCain. HELLO!
We fix it on election day.
I truly enjoy your comments.
Bah! Hyphenate hell is upon us.
Here are two steps that've been suggested on this forum recently:
1) Do away with the popular election of senators, and instead have the state legislators appoint them as was done in the past. This would take expensive Senate elections completely out of the equation.
2) Increase the number of representatives in the House. This would create smaller districts with fewer constituents, which would make election campaigns less expensive for congressmen.
Generally called "plus ups" in the "business". Often it's not so much that the lower level folks in an agency doesn't want it, but rather the higher ups don't want it, or can't get it past their higher ups relative to the budget.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.