The man who is President Obama's newly minted urban czar pocketed thousands of dollars in campaign cash from city developers whose projects he approved or funded with taxpayers' money

Today's Obama supporter talking point will be that this man has the experience to know how things get done in cities.

The vultures are circling, aren't they.

Another Obama nominee turns outto be a weasel?

This is pretty farking unreal. Embarassing.

Hopefully he paid his taxes on all that cash.

So it's only OK to accept campaign contributions in exchange for political favors if you are Republican. Got it.

After the last 8 years, Obama would have to have sex with boy scouts on the front lawn of the White House and charge the taxpayers for the condoms for me to care. Yawn.

change ... hope

Huh. No laws broken. Scandalous.

A Democrat that is dirty in my gov't? It is more likely than you think.


Pocketing money and gaining weatlth from the office, while you are supposed to be championing the less fortunate?

That is hypocrisy you can believe in.

3_Butt_Cheeks: Another Obama nominee turns outto be a weasel?

This is pretty farking unreal. Embarassing.

Hopefully he paid his taxes on all that cash.

Seriously, very unreal. I mean, it turns out only some of his appointees are corrupt.

Yes. I but but but Bush'd.

Phil Herup: A Democrat that is dirty in my gov't? It is more likely than you think.


Pocketing money and gaining weatlth from the office, while you are supposed to be championing the less fortunate?

That is hypocrisy you can believe in.

Why do you look at the speck that is in your brother's eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye?

shouldn't we have seen this coming? i mean, his last name is "carrion".

/not to mention: you-know-who would now share his first name had he also escaped to south america.

If Obama is clever he'll just give this guy a Congressional Medal of Freedom to distract everyone.

chipspastic
So it's only OK to accept campaign contributions in exchange for political favors if you are Republican. Got it.

Way to deflect there, Champ.

Wake me when they found he actually broke a law.

lhinds: chipspastic
So it's only OK to accept campaign contributions in exchange for political favors if you are Republican. Got it.

Way to deflect there, Champ.

Just wondering when the right is going to grow up and stop pointing fingers at the left for the same BS they are guilty of.

lhinds: chipspastic
So it's only OK to accept campaign contributions in exchange for political favors if you are Republican. Got it.

Way to deflect there, Champ.

He does that in most threads.

LouDobbsAwaaaay: Wake me when they found he actually broke a law.

Way to hold the bar even lower. That's good politkin' Lou.

LouDobbsAwaaaay

Wake me when they found he actually broke a law.

So ethical lapses are just fine so long as no laws are actually broken....You know the last administration was lambasted for such reasoning...probably by you

Pay for play is worse than lobbying and is an endemic part of Democratic local politics. But that might be because more Dems run major cities than Reps.

I know that vilifying lobbyists is popular, but at least full-time lobbyists have to register and the activity is regulated. Hell, anybody can lobby -- its a part of our representative democracy. Any one of you can call your representative's office and ask to speak with a representative or member of his/her office.

Also, whatever happened to the gazillion-page, all-intensive, super-ethical job application the Obama Administration put together? Does it only apply to guys who answer the phone?

"Carrion? Seems he should have checked his baggage. Hardy Har."

You dickheads are slipping.

Not great for Obama in the wake of his other appointment's issues, but it still fails to move the needle on my giveafukkometer.

atomsmoosher: Also, whatever happened to the gazillion-page, all-intensive, super-ethical job application the Obama Administration put together? Does it only apply to guys who answer the phone?

I want to know this too. I was proud of the job the vetters were doing during the election, what's happening now?

Phil Herup: Whaaarrgaaarbllle

lhinds: Whhhargaarbble

3_Butt_Cheeks: Whaaargarrblle


Pretty boring schtick.

InternetLOL: atomsmoosher: Also, whatever happened to the gazillion-page, all-intensive, super-ethical job application the Obama Administration put together? Does it only apply to guys who answer the phone?

I want to know this too. I was proud of the job the vetters were doing during the election, what's happening now?

The cynical answer is he won, he can do whatever he wants.

I don't think people had "Adolfo Carrion" as the next name for anything.

lhinds: So ethical lapses are just fine so long as no laws are actually broken....

No, they're not. But they aren't "scandals" either.

You know the last administration was lambasted for such reasoning...probably by you

Yes I did. Then, as now, I understand that this guy is a unethical douche, but he didn't commit a crime. This isn't the same as someone who commits fraud, no matter how much you'd like it to be.

let me see if I got this right?
Politically involved people who know their way around DC are for the most part corrupt.
Am I close?

LouDobbsAwaaaay: Wake me when they found he actually broke a law.



Democrat apologists could care less about ethics, think bending the law is OK.


[NEWSFLASH] -- we already know you have low standards

LouDobbsAwaaaay: I understand that this guy is a unethical douche

So he's a good choice for the job? I don't get what you seem to be defending here.

Phil Herup: I don't care if Republicans violate the constitution and actually break laws.

Yeah, yeah, we know

That's what you get when the guy you hired to vet your nominees (new window) is a corrupt sack of manure.

/So much for that gazillion page questionnaire

This is essentially the same thing Burris neglected to mention in his sworn statement. Democrats didn't do anything about him, what makes you think they'll even care this time? With three and a half trillion dollars about to flow out of Washington they have much more important things on their little minds anyway.

Hat Madder: This is essentially the same thing Burris neglected to mention in his sworn statement. Democrats didn't do anything about him, what makes you think they'll even care this time? With three and a half trillion dollars about to flow out of Washington they have much more important things on their little minds anyway.

Fortunately all Republicans are not going to take a dime of that money so as to show America their core values.

Phil Herup: Democrat apologists could care less about ethics, think bending the law is OK.

Phil Herup doesn't read my posts.

3_Butt_Cheeks: So he's a good choice for the job? I don't get what you seem to be defending here.

You Repub...sorry, Fark Independents, are trying to conflate this with the tax-fraud stories. One is breaking the law, the other is not. I know that concept can be very hard for you guys to grasp, so I'll say it again. In one case, a law is being broken. In the other, no law is being broken.

call me when he does something illegal.

Phil Herup: Pocketing money and gaining weatlth from the office, while you are supposed to be championing the less fortunate?

Its big business. If it wasn't, do you think those advocates for the poor groups would be fighting for all the government spending. I'd rather the money go straight to the poor than all the sticky fingers in between.

Hopefully he paid his taxes on all that cash.

Campaign contributions can be laundered into untaxable income.

3_Butt_Cheeks: lhinds: chipspastic
So it's only OK to accept campaign contributions in exchange for political favors if you are Republican. Got it.

Way to deflect there, Champ.

He does that in most threads.

LouDobbsAwaaaay: Wake me when they found he actually broke a law.

Way to hold the bar even lower. That's good politkin' Lou.

Pointing out Republican hypocrisy = deflection. Makes sense to me.

And just where should the "bar" be for elected officials? Please bestow upon us the gift of your infallible wisdom?

LouDobbsAwaaaay: Phil Herup doesn't read my posts.


I did. That quote was not even a cherry pick, it was the entire post.

LouDobbsAwaaaay: You Repub...sorry, Fark Independents, are trying to conflate this with the tax-fraud stories. One is breaking the law, the other is not. I know that concept can be very hard for you guys to grasp, so I'll say it again. In one case, a law is being broken. In the other, no law is being broken.

Not really. I mentioned the problems with other nominees. While not the same issues (TAXES) as the others, this still SUCKS. Having another nominee be an unethical farkwad is not a crime, but to marginalize it is pretty weak. I thought you Dem..."Fark Independants" were bringin some good ol fashioned change to DC.

chipspastic: And just where should the "bar" be for elected officials?

You need someone else to tell you this?

Judgment on this should be reserved for the people in the Bronx.
With legality issues being hard pressed to prove, did the tax payers in the Bronx, benefit from his efforts?
It looks like typical political back scratching common to both parties.

3_Butt_Cheeks: chipspastic: And just where should the "bar" be for elected officials?

You need someone else to tell you this?

If it's not the law, then yes.

3_Butt_Cheeks: Not really. I mentioned the problems with other nominees. While not the same issues (TAXES) as the others, this still SUCKS.

Yeah.

Having another nominee be an unethical farkwad is not a crime, but to marginalize it is pretty weak.

Recognizing the difference between committing a crime and not committing a crime is "marginalizing"?

That's the fakest farking name I've ever heard.

chipspastic: 3_Butt_Cheeks: chipspastic: And just where should the "bar" be for elected officials?

You need someone else to tell you this?

If it's not the law, then yes.


There is this thing called ETHICS. You should look it up. Kinda sad that what people are willing to accept from their leadership.

Just look at Charles Rangle for example. Same shiat, different toilet.

Phil Herup: Pocketing money and gaining weatlth from the office, while you are supposed to be championing the less fortunate?

You do realize candidates don't get to spend campaign donations on personal use, right? It's not really "pocketing" nor "gaining wealth" when all you can do with it is seek re-election.

LouDobbsAwaaaay: Recognizing the difference between committing a crime and not committing a crime is "marginalizing"?

I see you are clearly missing the point, most likely intentionally.

chipspastic: 3_Butt_Cheeks: chipspastic: And just where should the "bar" be for elected officials?

You need someone else to tell you this?

If it's not the law, then yes.


I manange to get through my day without breaking any laws, and without being an unethical piece of crap. How about we put the standard for cabinet nominees there, and move forward.

Phil Herup: chipspastic: 3_Butt_Cheeks: chipspastic: And just where should the "bar" be for elected officials?

You need someone else to tell you this?

If it's not the law, then yes.


There is this thing called ETHICS. You should look it up. Kinda sad that what people are willing to accept from their leadership.

Just look at Charles Rangle for example. Same shiat, different toilet.

Very good - that's why there are rules. Show me in the article where it says Carrion violated any ethics rules, or show me part of the ethics code he violated, or STFU.

3_Butt_Cheeks: I see you are clearly missing the point, most likely intentionally.

In other words, you got nothing. Thanks for playing.