In the wake of Sen. Ted Stevens' indictment, his GOP colleagues quickly began distancing themselves from the stink by dumping campaign contributions Stevens had doled out through his PAC. Among those playing "Take Back the Money" were Mitch McConnell, Elizabeth Dole, and John McCain. We've seen this game before, when politicians scrambled to rid themselves of donations from Enron and Jack Abramoff. Indeed, Dole has now won the Tainted Money Triple Crown, having divested herself of money from all three. The beauty of this D.C. dance is that it is always accompanied by insistent claims that political contributions have absolutely no impact. But no one ever explains why, if the money doesn't buy influence, there is such a rush to return it. Perhaps the answer can be found on Stevens' Bridge to Nowhere.
Follow Arianna Huffington on Twitter: www.twitter.com/ariannahuff
My point is that there's about 90 miles to Juneau, the state capital of Alaska, and no road! All travel into and out of the international railhead and road terminus, (was that Saudi prospecting Land Rovers I saw that summer?) is by ferry, you would think that instead of the "Bridge to Nowhere" he would have invested in a "road to the Capital". I flew into the small grassy field.
The problem is that political advertising is such a cash cow for the networks that they've forgotten this fundamental fact. And the FCC lets them get away with it!!
If free TV advertising were made available to major political candidates, I think the dependence on lobbyist's cash would definitely be diminished.
Just look at how elections are conducted in countries like Great Britain and Australia!! The election cycles in those countries is relatively short and sweet, a model for what the electoral process in the US should be like!!
While no one is entirely untainted, the differences between McCain and Obama are clear: when Obama finished law school (at Harvard, no less) I'm sure the could have landed a cushy job making six figures or more in some prestigious law firm. Instead, he devoted his life to community organizing and trying to make his neighborhood a better place.
McCain's record is one of a party-boy underachiever, who ditched his wife and traded her up for a someone more beautiful and mega-rich. That's what his former wife got for sticking by him while he was imprisoned in Vietnam. Without taking anything away from the horrific conditions he endured as POW, I'm sorry, but that one experience doesn't qualify him for sainthood, especially when he's undone his reputation with his sorry post-Vietnam record as a Senator.
We're all human, even Obama, and I would predict that the coming months will show even him to be an opportunist when it's convenient. But I think Obama is, at his core, a decent person and I can't imagine a better person being elected to the highest office in this country.
Failing to report gifts or income, equates to tax evasion, which is stealing from the people's bank, which is a crime against the nation. Perhaps political corruption should be regarded as treason instead of hand slapping.
http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/07252008/watch3.html
Wonderful and refreshing "lovethesinner"! And thanks for making me remember that most of our elected officials are basically good Americans. Now, and I really think this to be true, Mr. Obama represents our best chance to change how America does business.
Don't tell me that a sit down meeting with a President Obama and people like Mr. Hollings would not result in major changes to the election process. This one change would set in motion an acceptance by all Americans that Mr. Obama has the intelligence and conviction to slowly, but steadily, use the power of the office to make life better for EVERY American.
Mr. Obama has shown all his life that the diversity and adversity he faced growing up made him a strong, compassionate choice to lead the greatest nation that even our forefathers could have never imagined.
This is OUR Time - This is OUR Moment!
Obama '08!!!
The reason, I think, that Republicans run so fast and hard from news like this is that they cannot use their favorite (perhaps only) political strategy to deal with it - reframing. They have not found, nor are likely to find, an effective way to frame corruption as a virtue.
They have managed to re-frame the most central tenets of the Constitution as naivety, anti-intellectualism as patriotism, internationalism as treason, and popularity as evidence of a lack of merit. However, they haven't managed to come up with a good one for taking bribes.
To quote David Byrne, "Same as it ever was, same as it ever was."
Thank you AH for asking and answering the question.
Take back your mink;
Take back your pearls;
What made you think
That I was one of those girls?
Other than that, they have no function.
Through the years the original rationale behind the set-up, basically a good one, has played out until today when the only 'interests' served are those of constituents with the deepest pockets.
Somebody said that a government, any government, is only as 'good' as the people running it. I think it was the same 'somebody' who also concluded that a dictatorship run by a benevolent dictator is the most efficient, most beneficent form of government going.