"Both parties are equally corrupt"

This the game folks:
The conservative Republicans dominate the radio airwaves, for years, lambasting Democrats and "liberals" as the cause of all of society's ills. They pontificate how they, the conservatives, are the proper way to God and of Country.
Then, when any of their own are caught, they pull back and claim, "Both parties are equally corrupt".

"Bush and Gore are Exactly the Same."
"Bush and Gore are Exactly the Same."
"Bush and Gore are Exactly the Same."
"Bush and Gore are Exactly the Same."

N A D E R D I D N O T C O S T G O R E T H E E L E C T I O N!!!

If then Dems hadn't swung so far to the right, to the PRO CORPORATION DLC bullshit in 2000, Nader's run would have meant even less than it did.

Now children, repeat after me:

The repukes ran bush

The conservative dems ran Gore

Nader ran Nader -- the pukes had nothing to do with it!!!

John Hagelin of the 'Natural Law Party and Reform Party' got 2287 votes in Florida. So, it was Hagelin (and repuke dirty tricks, the Supreme Court and Gore's following the DLC assholes and running a wimpy campaign) that cost the election.

YEEEESSSSS HEEEEE DIIIIIIIIDDDDDD.....

:shrug:

Nader knew he couldn't win but would only help keep Kerry from winning. Everybody knew due to the Republicans mastery of disinformation and technical help from Diebold that it would take everything we could do to win. Nader is the biggest horse's ass in modern politics. He played no small part in delivering our Democracy into the hands of the fascists.




Nader defends GOP cash
Candidate says he's keeping money
Carla Marinucci, Chronicle Political Writer

Saturday, July 10, 2004

Democratic National Committee Chair Terry McAuliffe and former presidential candidate Howard Dean called for Ralph Nader to return donations from key Republican boosters -- but the independent presidential candidate insisted Friday he would not give in to what he called a Democratic "smear'' effort.

Nader, in what has become a public disagreement with his vice presidential candidate, Peter Camejo, strongly denied the recent windfall of donations from deep-pocketed Republicans was part of a GOP effort to wound Democratic presidential candidate Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts.

Nader, at a debate with Dean at the National Press Club in Washington, called for the end of "the commercial interests ... that have turned Washington into corporate-occupied territory,'' but he said he had no intention of returning the checks from Republican contributors.


The increased pressure for Nader to support Camejo's position and renounce a spate of recent donations from wealthy backers of President Bush came after The Chronicle reported Friday that 1 in 10 of Nader's biggest contributors as of May 31 also were major donors to the president's re- election campaign and the Republican Party.

Camejo, in an interview with The Chronicle on Thursday, said he would advise Nader to give back the checks if the aim of the wealthy GOP donors was to peel votes from Kerry.

McAuliffe agreed Friday with Camejo, saying Nader should take his running mate's advice and reject the cash from Bush's backers.

The donations to Nader's campaign are "a concerted effort by Republicans. ... They're not even hiding what their intentions are," McAuliffe said in an interview Friday with The Chronicle.

"These men are traditional Republican donors who want to see Bush kept in office," he said.

The Chronicle analysis also showed that $23,000 of about $275,000 Nader had raised in $1,000 checks or more had come from Republicans who also contributed to the Bush-Cheney re-election effort or other Republican Party committees. Many of the contributions were given to Nader in the past three months. The figures were gathered from reports filed with the Federal Elections Commission and reflected campaign activity through May 31.

got money from "democrats".

What the hell does that prove?

delete.

Al Gore ran a progressive campaign and turned his back on the DLC.
The "conserative" Dems did NOT run Gore.

What a bunch of crap.

The Republicans donated heavily to Nader's campaign as a spoiler.
Nader did tell voters there was no difference between Dems and Repubs.

If you don't know the history, which you clearly don't, quit lecturing people.

you must have been listening to a different media than I was in 2000.

I thought Gore was totally muzzled during that campaign. They didn't even let him say anything about the environment, etc.

Who the hell else was running his campaign?


(Define "Progressive"?)

but I should know better than to quibble with you about facts.

It's easy to equivocate in retrospect, but let's leave revisionist history to the Republicans, shall we? The fact that Nader ran a leg of his campaign entitled "Don't Waste Your Vote - Gore and Bush marginally differ" is symptomatic of his drive to instill the notion that there was no difference. This wasn't one quote; hell no, this was a theme of Nader's campaign.

No offense, but your denial is so reminiscent of, well, you know.

**************************************************************
Bush & Gore are same corporate party; would impeach Clinton

Nader says he doesn’t care whether Bush or Gore wins. The two, he rails, are “part of one big corporate party,” with no real differences. Indeed, Nader argues that former President George Bush was better than Bill Clinton is on issues like occupational safety. Nader also says that is he had been in the Senate, he would have voted to impeach Clinton: “He disgraced the office.”

What Nader wants is to build a permanent progressive force. “This is a new political movement,” he says.

Source: Matthew Cooper, Time magazine, p. 79 Nov 6, 2000

***

Don’t waste your vote: Gore & Bush only marginally differ

Nader is wrapping up a national tour with the theme “Don’t Waste Your Vote.” Gore and Bush, he said, “are both so marginal on the great issue of the distribution of power and wealth, and the corruption of cash register politics, that whatever real differences they are willing to fight for pale in comparison to the major subjects they are exactly on the same page on.”

Source: Thomas Edsall, Washington Post, p. A1 Oct 23, 2000

repeating ad nauseam the often baseless AP releases that carry the meme (see the Abramoff-Dorgan story).

on such baseless grounds. Byron Dorgan is our ally. He is one of the good ones out there.

.

Both parties are corrupt, but to say it just so they can further themselves is evil.

The Dems are like an 8 yr old stealing a pack of gum at the corner store.

The GOP steals the store.

and global terrorism to flourish.

Could the Republican party and their mediwhores be any more guilty of treason against this country - their priorities are completely anti-American.

the Dems were nearly as corrupt as the pukes back in the "good old days". That's where the current crowd in Congress learned how. They're doing the same shit that Lyndon Johnson, Sam Rayburn, et. al. did.

The major difference is that most of the Dems were slightly embarrassed at their own corruption; the pukes consider it their due and aren't ashamed at all.

The pokes believe that they are the annointed ones in this phony economic system -- they are the enlightened, the smartest and deserve the spoils.

Now the White House -- now THERE'S Corruption -- makes the Grant Administration look like Boy Scouts.

The Republican tendency toward fascism, as evidenced by the Bush administration, is what is really frightening.

When I think about my child's future, it scares me to think of the difference:

In the old imperfect world, some made a lot of money by being corrupt, but it was also possible to have integrity and still make a good living with hard work, smarts, and luck.

In the new anti-perfect world, only the corrupt survive?

that was simply a function of them having more power than the Republicans. Why bribe someone when they don't have any power. After 1994, the GOP has had more scandals, simply because they have more power to buy. When the Democrats take back Congress, the pendulum will likely swing back.

No pun intended, but really you are saying that repukes are more corrupt right now because they have more power.

But, Clinton did leave a surplus (remember Greenspan saying how the surplus was a bad thing?) Clinton did grow the middle class and reduced the number of poor, while still maintaining a healthy stock market. Clinton did improve environmental policy. Clinton did strengthen the managing abilities of FEMA and he certainly worked for his money.

Sure there are corrupt Dems but overall they seem to be better managers and stewards of our government and our middle class. Right now the only reason we don't have a major depression is because we are eating the middle class created by Clinton. Once the corporations, the haves, and have mores, have chewed through the middle class, there is no telling what economic woes will follow. The parallels to the 1920s, right before the Great Depression, are so numerous, I wonder that the administration is still able to fix the economic numbers to hide the obvious coming storm.

I am talking about taking bribes.

What do you think it's for?

Big business can make more profit simply by changing the rules/policies, in spite of their claims that it's due to "hard work". Lobbying is one way to do change the rules, bribing is another.

Liberal organizaions such as the Sierra Club and labot unions do plenty of lobbying. Is that corrupt?

Bribing is though, and both bribing and lobbying is a means to change the rules in favor of those who have the money to bribe and lobby. Who has more money, big corporations or unions?

I would say that lobbying is unbalanced because it depends on money; those with more money have more influence on the political process - which is very much at odds with democratic principals.

around with the congressional post office. tip o'neil wasn't it.

Rostenkowski, Daniel David (b. 1928) — also known as Dan Rostenkowski; "Rosty"; "Chicago Powerhouse" — of Chicago, Cook County, Ill. Born in Chicago, Cook County, Ill., January 2, 1928. Son of Joseph P. Rostenkowski. Democrat. Served in the U.S. Army during the Korean conflict; member of Illinois state house of representatives, 1953-55; member of Illinois state senate, 1955-59; U.S. Representative from Illinois, 1959-95 (8th District 1959-93, 5th District 1993-95); defeated, 1994; delegate to Democratic National Convention from Illinois, 1960, 1964, 1968, 1976, 1984, 1988, 1992. Catholic. Member, Veterans of Foreign Wars; Kiwanis; Knights of Columbus; Moose. Indicted in 1994 on 17 felony charges; pleaded guilty in April 1996 to two counts of misuse of public funds; sentenced to seventeen months in federal prison; released in 1997. Still living as of 2001.
http://politicalgraveyard.com/bio/rossdale-rotan.html

on C-Span. They are talking about campaign finance. Open Secrets web owner is on today from the .....opensecrets.org. He is pretty much down the middle of the road but this sly point caught my attention.

both parties are working together to take this country down. there are only a few good souls left on both sides trying to make it right.
how can lieberman still be called a democrat. hilary is more of a warhawk than some republicans.

He starts out making bold proclamations about the glory of the Bush administration.

I shoot down his points one by one, replacing his loudmouth opinions with actual facts.

Eventually he retreats into "Well, all politiciancs are corrupt."

Maybe so, BIL, but yours have perfected the art of criminal sleaze. To the point where they are destrying America in the span of just a few years.

*sound o' crickets*


Republicans: the party of big mouths and weak cop-outs.

the ONLY reason that the Dems aren't as corrupt as the 'Pukes these days is becaise they are OUT OF POWER...

There are remarkably few who are without blemish...look at the latest Abramoff "bribery scandal" - Four Dems received $$$, as well as four 'Pukes...

Some democrats may have dirty hands, but these bush republicans are
MADE OF MUD!

...seque to particulars vis. a vis. Abramhoff, Reed, Delay, Cunningham, Cheney/Haliburton, Enron, blah blah blah blah blah....

and less-than-honest dealings. I think it is useless to figure out which side is worse.

When somebody goes down on either side, we should just dust off and get up. We've had our own share of bosses. Like Rostenkowski, whom Clinton pardoned in 2000. For years Dems were known for their union shennanigans.

But at this moment, it seems to me the Republicans have raised corruption to a new and especially lucrative level.

(sorry - I don't remember who - maybe Mark Crispin Miller) said that comparing the two parties is like comparing a pickpocket ring and the Cosa Nostra.

The Republicans tend to work together in lockstep, they seem better able to toss personal ethics than the Democrats. I don't know if it's the difference in how different kinds of people think as well as how they view the world, but working with Democrats seems more like herding cats. Maybe they just value their independence more.

Many of the founding "fathers" were distrustful of political parties because of their propensity to be controlled by special interests. I just wish they could have insulated us from that a bit better. Now we need to find ways to dilute the power held by the two most powerful parties. This winner take all just isn't working all that well.

Instant run off voting might warrant some consideration.

that "75% of the Dem party and 95% of the Repub party is corrupt".

Either way there's way to much corruption in both parties.

I usually say "THAT IS NOT TRUE." What IS true is that the Bush Administration is corrupt and needs to be removed from office - end of discussion.

The Democratic party may have been more corrupt years ago but all those corrupt politicians have moved over to the party where they can make the real money, the GOP. Remember the Dixiecrats? They're all Repugs now. Then in '94, many Dems jumped ship. Ben Nighthorse Campbell comes to mind.

So we've pretty much gotten rid of the corrupt ones. They went on to the GOP so they could perfect their money laundering skills.

When it became clear that lots and lots of treason and other impeachable/criminal offense had been committed over the last few years, they decided not to embrace the indefensible and instead decided to run with "they're just as bad". Another lie, but not quite as hard for the Libeciles to believe.

We've heard for years and years that the REPUBLICAN party has more money. I rest my case.

thread. I think the GOP shows itself to be the Greedy Ol' Perverts party.

because Delay and the Republicans laid the law down to lobbyists when they came to power in 1994...if they did not doante to Republicans, they would not get in the door. Otherwise, it may have been true. But the facts say something else.

PUBLIC FINANCING OF CAMPAIGNS!!!

Along with Single Payer Universal Health Care!!!!

These are the two most important REAL REFORMS that should be made in this country. Think about what a different, and potentially real, democracy we could have with those two simple changes.



While you're at it, think about ELIMINATING THE TAX DEDUCTION for ADVERTISING EXPENSES over a certain maximum ceiling (say about $10,000). Wouldn't it be a glorious world???!!! No billboards, TV gone back to selling content instead of ads, no billions in slush funds to buy politicians, etc. It's my understanding that most of the lobbying done in DC is pretty much paid for out of "Marketing" budgets -- certainly the most egregious lobbying. The Sierra Club, AARP, (yes and the NRA) lobbying efforts are policy and philosophically based. They are the minority. The vast majority are just trying to grease the skids for BIG BUSINESS in their constant war against the rest of us -- the working folks.

... just like everything else. The roots of Democratic corruption (both financial and electoral) were in the big city machines of the East and Midwest and the non-stop corruption of the South. The big cities mostly cleaned up their act (yeah, I know... but it is relative) and the Southern cretans defected to the Republicans.

All new innovations and advances in corruption have come, since Goldwater, in the Republican Party - in fact, it is probably the single greatest pillar of their party.

It's hard to know and there will always be anecdotes, but I would bet that "Democratic Party" corruption isn't at a level of 1% of that of the Republicans... probably not at 1% of the level of Texas, alone.

enough Dems give keep giving them the ammunition.

Same thing with "it was a bipartisan policy" or "it was bipartisan legislation."

If the Dems want to be known as the party that stands for integrity- then it's members all need to get aboard- and those who choose not to, have to be held accountable.

Simple as that.

It's not a question of who is more corrupt, but rather, who came to power claiming to be morally superior. That's the clincher, and a surefire way to end any Repug's argument about both parties being equally corrupt.

"But MOM, Johnny smokes crack, too."

Same tact they've used with Bush's War, "Well, the Democrats voted for it, too."

It's the Tommy-did-it-too defense and it wouldn't work on Mom or a teacher, and it shouldn't work with on free press.

An interviewer can say to the effect, "I'll ask the Democrats about ABC, but right now I'm asking a Republican about their criminality."

The "everybody does it" defense is inexcusable. And if everyone really is doing it then it just proves that we don't need reform - we need a complete and immediate overhaul to publicly financed campaigns - which won't cost us a dime compared to what all this corruption is costing us.

On a wholesale level the corporate media sole reason for being is to define reality for the masses. In reality there is nothing FREE about the press, it is almost an oxymoron by definition.

The statment that both parties are equally corrupt is totally and completely false. It was not the Democratic Party that sold out troop to get money in their pockets. It was not the Democratic Party that illegally redistricted Texas. It was not the Democratic Party that had ties to Jack Abramoff. There are not Democrats currently under investigation for taking bribes from lobbyist.

or try to peddle it here....

Pelosi and Reid and the DCCC and the DSCC need to send out memos to candidates and Congress Critters, and urge them to sever any inappropriate ties. This might be hard because I hear Reid and Pelosi's name come up from RWers as offenders (or spouses and parents).

Also the DNC and the Minority House and Senate leader need to come up with ethics proposals to be followed, and campaign on it. And then keep their word. No more lobbyists writing laws, no Democratic version of the K Street project, restriction and regulation on lobbying firms, and a waiting period law for former Congress people working at lobbying firms.

How would you measure a thing like that?

I think politics are inherently corrupt, as well as dishonest and hypocritical. Therefore, you will find these problems on all sides.

That said, I think this is the difference:

Corruption, dishonesty, and hypocrisy are embraced by the right as valid weapons of control.

equally corrupt. Doing the bidding of their corporate daddies.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

...and I agree, most every election is a choice between two middle aged, conservative, white men in identical blue suits.

I would never say that about Dennis Kucinich and lump him in there.
There are others also.

You broadbrush way too much.
Enjoy your stay here. You might want to focus and get a little more detailed or it won't be a long stay I am afraid.

http://www.kucinich.us/

You could throw in Cyn McKinney, Maxine Waters and a few others. But most of the time it isthose two conservative men in identical blue suits. How many minorities in the US Senate. Think SHRED, quick! There isn't a dimes worth of difference in the parties or their representatives 99% of the cases.

I was responding to dumbo's sweeping assertions (in CAPS) re-read it please.

My RW radar goes off when I see such posts, especially by a first timer.
I will bet "dumbo" doesn't last here, I hope I am wrong but I am pretty good at reading posts.

in the meantime I'm kicking your Duke-drug thread. It didn't get enough play late last night.
Later,
Dances w/Cats

thanks...

:hi:

I give him 8 Posts.

And perhaps I'm being kind.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2289978#2291552

Seems to me you are an Oxymoran all your own.

Enjoy your brief stay.

Hopefully it will be brief and uncomfortable.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

I knew it!
Another freeper bites the dust.
I could just tell by the response they posted.

*pats self on back*

Yeah, I like to blast away at the bastards when I spot them but I go over the top then they delete my shit, too!
TO THE FORUMS!
R

then wait for the silence.

Look at the money they throw at hard and soft money efforts that WE CAN SEE!! Now imagine all the money that they filter and flow in a brazillian other ways to influence peddle.

Dems don't have anything to approach the corruption among Pubs.

As for the Nader thing, YES HE WAS FUNDED MAJORLY BY PUBS IN 2000.

Turn people off, make sure they think they can't make any difference, they think both parties are the same -- and they stay home and watch football.

Ask yourselves: Who does it serve to turn people off?

Hekate

and telling them all the repug is doing wrong. first they are surprised they dont know this shit. then they try to end it with, both parties do it equallly. then i explode. no they dont. that is what yawl use to get out of owning what you are doing wrong

i consistantly hear that, or..... we are all sinners. only to say, everyone else who sins is going ot hell, a repug, just a shrug and we are all sinner. aint gonna fly

If you believe the DLC are Democrats, anyway.

It is no accident that both parties supported the rape of Iraq because their corporate masters coveted the oil fields.

It is no accident that Bush and Kerry aligned themselves with the elites of Latin America, specifically in Venezuela and Bolivia.

My mother trotted this out during the election last year when I hit her with numerous comments about Republican chicanery, her only response was "they all do it."

If our people are "doing it", they must be exposed and flushed out. I have no qualms about that.

Accountablity back to the Washington.

I've been researching ALL corruption...Dems can't even get into the door, by comparison. You just won't find a systemic problem. A few Dems in Chicago and Tennesee is about it.

As for the Abramoff-Tribal...Dem recipients(6 in total) claim they did not know the Tribal Reps and contributions were involved with Abramoff. This is more believable than coming from the mouths of Republicans. Because, Dems have always been involved in tribal
projects and economy.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=2286333