Dems reelect William Jefferson in a runoff. This is a real embarrasement and speaks to the continuance of corruption here in Louisiana: http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/12/09/louisiana.house.ap/index.html
This article tries to be non-confrontational, but in an NPR interview this morning it seems certain that Jefferson will be indicted for certain. There is just some legal wrangling over the dough in the freezer to finalize first.
I am a liberal, but no doubt the Dems worry me. The Republican congress was absolutely no ethics and an ear mark- bridge to nowhere free for all, Abromoffesque 'government for sale' and they were voted out. But the people who voted blue haven't necessarily signed on, and if the Democrats can't find a spine ethically and fiscally, the Repubs will get the congress back in the next election.
William Jefferson- the new William Jefferson Clinton. The latest distraction, and you don't even have to learn to spell another name. Isn't that special?
I hope that the Ethics Committee gets to work on this guy the instant that the new congress convenes. It's a perfect way for the Dems to demonstrate that there's a new sheriff in town.
Welcome to our democracy. I am a pretty conservative fella but nothing rankles me more than politicians who are ethically bankrupt. I dont care if they are democrats or republicans.
This thread has a stupid headline. The phrase DOESN'T refer to individual corrupt congressmen, who, like the poor, will always be with us. The phrase refers to systemic, approved-by-leaders corruption. But it's easier to be hiply, if ignorantly, cynical about all politics, than to identify problems, and then work on solutions. Solutions that can matter, you'd think, especially, to someone from NOLA. But I guess the facade of being oh-so-smart and above all the seaminess (real and exaggerated) is more important than making gvt. work.
If convicted, I would agree. But merely indicted, maybe not. I am among those in amazement that this guy could be voted back in. The evidence just seems so overwhelming.
Not sure about your point, so I'll just break down my point for you: New Orleans reelects corrupt Congressman. Bad. A culture of corruption is a culture of behavior and pressure (or lack thereof), that allows or turns a blind eye to corrupt activities. The reelection of a congressman who is demonstrably corrupt implies a culture of corruption. It's a play on the phrase that the dems made popular in the last election. There can be more than one culture of corruption. Si? One in Washington. One in New Orleans.
Yes. And I noticed the phrase int the thread title was capitalized. You didn't think that was a reference to the Dems' campaign slogan? Maybe. But given what you post here, I think I can be forgiven for assuming you were trying to bash the Dems in Congress, because that fits with your tired, "plague on both your houses" fingerpointing.
Ummm... Yea it was. And if you read a mere 3 posts back I said "It's a play on the phrase that the dems made popular in the last election." So. Yea. Whatever. At least Karl just goes away quitely...
Not after I actually read the first post. You know enough history to know how long Louisiana has had a "culture of corruption" in its politics. That phrase has been in use long before the dems made it their own.
A pox on both their houses. No, really, a pox on both their houses. Yes, it's hard. I feel so bad for those Democrats who now have to learn "the categories." I mean before they could just bitch and moan about GWB to affirm their identity with the Left but now, they have to learn the difference between Shiites, Sunnis, Hezbollah and Hamas. It's hard work.
Well, that was certainly distressing. I still have hope the dems are going to be as hopelessly stupid the reeps were.
I have no doubt your wish will be fulfilled. Well, maybe not quite as stupid as to get caught with $90,000 in their freezer, but otherwise I think you're good.