dannyboy said:
were so quick to pull out the name of abrams and the scandals that supposedly involved nothing but republicans, and yet we learn that the democrats have their own scandal brewing with a gent by the name of Harry Reed? It was so interesting that they were salivating at the prospect and posting that Bush would be in jail shortly.
Funny, I guess we chumps that were too stupid to know, dont make a big deal of the Dem's going to jail.
It will be interesting to watch how it will be a tit for tat investigation, with only the taxpayer getting the screw.
Shame
d
Dboy,
What we are seeing in scandals concerns republicans is not new and what the democrat apologist out there may have forgotten are the scandals among many leading democratic Congress leaders in the early 90's that in many ways was the seedbed to the Republican Congress takeover in 1994' and the now dead Contract With America. As ironic as this is to think but the Republicans really had their best years and got more done from Jan. 95' when they took office through about 97'. They stayed on point for the most part and so many democrats point to Clinton and extolling his fiscal virtues when in fact for Americans it was a perfect world of one party controlling the Congress and the other controlling the White House where the ability from a purely partisan political perspective, the seperation of powers doctrine really worked. Whether you agree with the economics or not, to Clinton's credit and his fortune he enjoyed the fruition of many of the Reagan economic policies finally coming to bare and Clinton, even with his tax heavy early legislation, his administration was smart enough to only pull a few apples out of the barrel while still allowing those policies to roll on. Truth is IMO both Clinton and the Republican Congress get equal credit for the good years the bulk of the 90's were because they kept each other honest.
In a general historical sense, most presidencies experience problems in the 2nd term and corruption sets in as people get comfortable and feeling their oats. Johnson had problems in his 2nd term, everyone knows about Nixon and Carter would likely have had the same had he gotten a 2nd term and Reagan had Iran/Contra. Same could be said for Bush Sr. as was said for Carter. I'll predict right now that whoever is elected after GW and if they serve 2 terms, there will be some controversy during the 2nd term. It's the nature of man and his politics.
As for the democrats who after so many decades of leadership got corrupt, so now we are seeing it with the republicans. It has nothing to do with party or political beliefs, it's purely human nature. Who's to say Tom Delay isn't payback for Jim Wright or Dan Rostenkowski who went to jail over the Congressional post office scandal. Rostenkowski was the leader of Ways and Means which sets tax policy which is a very powerful position to hold. It's no real secret that the push to impeach Clinton was as much about payback for Nixon as it was anything else. Oh, we'll have the moralist tell us otherwise but as much corruption as seem to flow around the 1990's White House, that was the best you could do? Sorry, I don't buy that at all!
Corruption and gov't just go hand in hand with human nature. Give a libertarian the same scenario and you'd see the same corruption over time too. None of us are immune, even myself. If a person refuses to wash their hands, over time the body will become infected more and more with germs, the immune system now broken down and at some point the body will die. So to is it with mankind and his eons of forming bodies of governace, many of them great wonders and good things in the beginning but over time mankind's nature comes into play and he/she siezes for themselves more and more power and with it comes the corruption as they attempt to hold on to that power as others position to take it. The founding fathers even with their many faults understood this flaw of man and attempted to form a system that was very small and limited on the national scale as this form of gov't was the greatest distance from the people. Their desire was for the local gov't to be the Go-To guy because this was at the doorstep of the people and allowed the people to react the quickest when corruption naturally at some point ozzzed to the surface. We left that thinking long, long ago I'm sad to say.
I'm coming to the belief that the most gets done when the executive and legislative branches get shook up by elections and the 2 are divided by political party.
