I'm still struggling to get outraged about the Burns-Abramoff connection. Let's see: Guy wants Congress to do something. Guy gives money to people in Congress. They vote the way he wants.
And exactly how is this different from what goes on there every day?
I always thought the outrage about Burns is that he preaches fiscal restraint, then runs every six years on his record as a pork roller. Giving people what they pay for may not be virtuous, but it isn't hypocritical.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
29 comments:
No, Burns oughta be dumped for being either a liar or a moron....OR BOTH! He couldn't "remember" why he changed his vote on the Mariana's bill. HE COULDN'T REMEMBER for cryin' out loud! What the hell does THAT tell us about the "senator"? He is going to vote one way, then get's a message and a donation from Jack, and his vote changes. AND HE CAN'T REMEMBER WHY! Hmm. He's a bad liar. And if he didn't nothing wrong, why the need to lie? Read Jennifer McKee's fine article regarding this matter. The ONLY two possibilities are that he's a moron or a liar. OR a crook! Take your pick.
The auctioneer sold out to the high bidder. If we don't have a problem with it, then perhaps it is we who have the problem.
People are doing with the system exactly as the system was meant to be done with. They're buying favors. It's legal bribery. What's the problem?
The problem is, dufus, that Jackoff Abrams has already copped a plea! He's goin' to jail! And in order to serve less time, he's takin' some people WITH him! So, we've seen the tip so far. The tip of the DAMN ICEBERG! Crimes were committed. There ARE laws you know. Burns is goin' to the big house. The Rethugs will dump him, but he's too damn dumb to recognize it. Hell, they've already dumped him. He's attempting to defend himself with the help of this guy form Jersey. It's hopeless though. Burns will simply waste a WHOLE LOT of his donations in a futile attempt to save his arse! Good riddance! The Rethugs should be announcin' an alterNUT to Corny any day now. Mark my words. I've got the inside track on this one.
Kralj, call me a dufus again and I'll come to Great Falls and pull you down the steps of the Civic Center by your scrawny little balls. If I can find them. Get your face out of the cups long enough to show a modicum of respect for other people here, stop with the goddam rants, and for once in your life try to see all sides of an issue. You're confused as a mouse in a maze, headed down staight hallways, sure that you know where you're going, lost as can be.
We aren't outraged by Abrams' crimes. His sin strikes a deeper chord than that. Abrams doubled-crossed his clients, and he called them less than human.
In our minds, all Americans are businessmen, and Abrams has committed a crime against the business mind.
As Abrams burns at the stake of public opinion, the flames lick Conrad as well.
Threatening violence are we now, dufus. That's good.
What kind of sad little fella threatens violence against someone with whom he disagrees? A very sad little fella indeed!
Seems that the Presidunce has done a leetle lying bout his Monica Moment. He told us all along that he didn't even KNOW this Jack fella. Turns out that it's partly true. Bush doesn't know jack, but he DEFINITELY knows Jack Abramoff! Pictures don't lie, only Bush lies! More ane more pictures of Bush with Jack are surfacing. Maybe it's time for another impeachment for lying, for lying about a hummer is one thing, but lying about scandal is quite another!
Guess that anon fella doesnt' take your threats of bodily harm too seriously there, dufus. Maybe, like your mouse analogy implies, you best take your OWN mouse balls and go home! Better to take your balls home if you can't get your way!
Careful there, Tony, that fella with the mouseballs might threaten to kick your ass too!
Kralj- Who's got a problem posting their name now? Your posts (all 5 or 6 of them) are mindless drivel. With all your "credentials", you think you could try sounding intelligent once in a while.
I think David's got a good point though, and I'm with him on this one. I think we already should have been outraged about lobbying and how it's taken complete control of our government. We didn't need this scandal to tell us that. It's just sad to me that most Democrats only get outraged when the leaders of the party are telling us to get outraged. The bottom line is, that Abramoff has become the only villain here, the face of the enemy. That's kind of sad, really, because I'm sure there are so many more Jack Abramoffs out there. A lot of people are just going be satisfied that he's gone down, when the solution should go much deeper than that.
I don't have a problem with Max Baucus going to jail for taking money from Abramoff.
David, sometimes I don't get you. You don't see what the brouhaha is about an elected official possibly trading votes for money? You don't understand the difference between lobbying and graft? (A fine distinction, I'll grant you.) If you're not angry about the Burns/Abramoff affair, then you're getting exactly what you deserve from your elected official. Me, I demand better.
Todd
I'm voting for Senator Burns, and will do whatever I can to help his campaign.
The whole issue is nothing more than election-year-politics.
Lobbyists have existed in Washington since the beginning, and will always be there.
THE HAIR OF THE DOG! I simply love the Repub response to the Abrams scandal. Burns is accused of possibly shaking down Jack. In other words, taking bribes. So, what is the Repub camp doing to get Burnsie re-elected? RAISING EVEN MORE MONEY! Talk about cyncical. Money talks. And money wins election most of the time, no doubt. But will that really be an asset this time for good old boy Connie? Won't the fact that he's spendin' "billions and billions" (sorry Carl) of illgotten dollars to get his sorry butt re-elect seem just a leetle unseemly to Montana voters? I'd say yes! In other words, Abramoff will STILL be assisting his pal Connie! Sumtin' real sick about this system. So, Connie finds himself as a litmus test. Will Montana voters let Abramoff buy an election from prision? I'm betting no, YOU BET! We said bye bye to the heapleach mining industry even though they outspent the opposition by ten to one. I think Connie's corruption is the new mining issue! Montanans are tired of gettin' mined by the likes of Connie and Jack!
But ya gotta give Connie credit for chutzpah! He was "trying to help the Indian people". Yeah RIGHT! This from a racist bastard who refers to Arabs as ragheads and Blacks as n*ggers! And this from Connie, who tried like hell to undo Indian sovereignity! Yeah, that Connie, he's a real humanitarian. Why, he wanted to give one of the richest tribes around three million dollars! Course, his pal jack was on the recievin' end. But still, I think Connie likes Indian people!
Todd, I guess what I'm saying is that the distinction is a little too fine for me. I know politicians are supposed to say, "Gee, thanks for the cash, but don't expect any favors when it comes time to cast votes." But in campaigns that depend on a perpetual cycle of raising money, how can it not make a difference? Nobody has to buy a vote; nobody has to sell one. Nobody even has to wink. The system works exactly the same either way.
what the heck does "n*ggers" mean?
or is that like "f*cking n*ggers"?
Hey, a couple'a closet burns' supporters! See how intelligent his followers are. Corny is really representative of your average Montanan allright!
The lobbyist money may help with Burns' campaign, but I hope Montanans remember that money doesn't get a politician elected. Votes do. We need to decide if what Conrad Burns did was unethical. If we think it was, it won't take Montanans long to vote one of the other candidates into office. Montana voters are smart enough to decide on this issue, whether it is a campaign issue, election-year politics or politics-as-usual. Personally, I think Burns stepped in a cowpie here, but I'm not sure our other reps in WaDC are doing much better. Maybe a house cleaning is in order. Let's let the voters decide.
All right! Correct! But I was just seein' if you'all were payin' attention. Also, like Burns, I was just bein' folksy.
Eric, you won't get the chance to support Burns. Someone's gonna have to swing for the Abramoff debacle; he's already plea-bargained. He'll sing, and your party will need a sacrificial lamb. Burns is dirty, and he's from a small state, electorally, and he had only a 39% approval rating before being caught with his hand in the jar. Burns'll be the Montana Scooter Libby. The GOP will offer his head on a platter, Racicot will rush to the rescue, and you'll be supporting the election bid of Marc Racicot sometime in the near future. But I'm curious: Why would you be so gung-ho about a crooked, bought, racist, illiterate, ineffectual failed businessman from Missouri in the first place, when you could throw your support behind a decent, honest, smart, hardworking Montana farmer?
Todd
Nobody will swing for it.
For the record, Kralj was railing on Steve T. over at Left in the West for not posting using his full name, yet posts anonymously here. He uses the American standard of ethics - that is, he applies rules of moral conduct to others, and not himself.
Aw go on you guys. Marx said you get a government (superstructure) that reflects the economic system (infrastructure). This is a capitalist economy. Go figure and stop your whining.
For the record, Mark t, did you ever know that you're my heeero! You are the wings beneath my feet!
steviet
Why don't you two fellows get a room!...........down at the Brokeback Motel!
Post a Comment