What I love about corruption in DC is that it's just so damned tacky.
Al Wynn is running in Maryland's fourth Congressional district for reelection against progressive challenger Donna Edwards. Wynn sat in Congress for fifteen years with no challenges until Donna came along in 2006, helping every corporate interest that came his way. I'm not going to advocate for Donna much in this post. I just want you to feast your eyes on this incredible tacky specimen of a fundraiser invitation.
Who knew Verizon had a good government committee?
There's lots of good information on the race and the dynamics of it here. The primary is on February 12, and you can find more on Donna here.
Corruption even makes bad font choices.
Follow Matt Stoller on Twitter: www.twitter.com/matthewstoller
cognito ergo populistae
John Edwards.
That money from those who violated our privacy without a court order at the request of Bush is being funneled into campaigns against good progressives may be opening some eyes.
Corporatist Democrats are responsible for enabling Bush, and we must organize to remove them from office.
The primaries are the battleground for the heart and soul of the Democratic party and pretending like the Republicans are the only enemy to the progressive movement would be a disastrous mistake.
What this shows is that Republicans haven't cornered the market on corruption. Granted, they have proven themselves more than capable of taking corruption to unheard of heights but Democrats play wannabes, which is why progressive thinking people shouldn't always vote for someone just because they are a Democrat. Official Washington corruption is nearly endemic and if Democrats gain control of government you can bet that business interests will work to ensure maintenance of the economic and social status quo, and, that progressive ideas never see the light of day.
Accordingly, it’s clear that our current government structure is simply no longer viable. It is impossible under our present system to separate the decision makers and the influencers to a sufficient degree to be able trust the outcome as having democratic reliability. A major reason that this is so is that we have no true means available to test the legitimacy of policy direction, let alone individual decisions, by declaring that a majority of us just lack confidence. We have virtually nothing available other than impeachment, and impeachment is so cumbersome as to provide no remedy.
The will of the most outstanding individual imaginable in the Whitehouse? That still leaves 535 other “deciders” who are susceptible to being bought and sold, especially with the sums available in a system where even a trillion dollars no longer qualifies as being too much money to imagine. Campaign finance reform? I’m not sure that helping high quality, but not well to do, people gain high office is really going to ensure that their votes can’t be “bought” in one of the many ways in which this sort of thing is done.
So is there an absolute answer. Possibly not, but even having the ability to vote the scoundrels out on a whim would seem to be a large improvement over waking up daily for four solid years and cursing the fools who clearly are not going to give us what we are vociferously demanding of them. We need to meet, we need to brainstorm, and we need to create a government that is sufficient to manage the problems of these extraordinary times.
THE SECOND AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION!!!