money=free speech
bribery usually involves money
bribery illegal now= violation of first amendment ?

We are sooooo farked. *sigh*

The system is rigged, one of the rig-masters is telling you how he did it. The only question now is why we don't care to change it.

China executes corrupt officials, we simply make the corruption legal.

It should be easier. The american national attitude is "what's in it for me".

Abramoff: As I look back it was effective. It certainly helped the people I was trying to help, both the clients and the Republicans at that time.

He must have forgotten that his scandal was bi-partisan. And a non-story. WTF is wrong with this guy?

FTA:Abramoff: I was actually thinking of writing a book - "The Idiot's Guide to Buying a Congressman" - as a way to put this all down.

I feel like this would have a better chance of getting noticed than the punbelievably shiatty "Capitol Punishment". Sounds like Segal direct-to-dvd garbage.

Guy bribes congressmen.
Angry mob: OFF WITH HIS HEAD!
What about the congressman who accepted the bribe and gave the advantage?
Angry mob: *crickets*

aearra: It should be easier. The american national attitude is "what's in it for me".

Which, of course, gives life to the TEA Party motto "Fu*k you, I've got mine".

CanonicalNerd: The system is rigged, one of the rig-masters is telling you how he did it. The only question now is why we don't care to change it.

Because that's asking the fox to guard then hen house.

AbsentFriends: The guy doing the bribing? Put him in jail.

There, problem fixed.

Not necessary to put the guys receiving the bribes in jail. That would just be completely over the top.

Ney went to jail. too.

Anti_illuminati: aearra: It should be easier. The american national attitude is "what's in it for me".

Which, of course, gives life to the TEA Party motto "Fu*k you, I've got mine".

Rapidly followed by: "OMFG keep your hands off my SS and Medicare, I voted for you to cut government spending, not to stop my money coming back to me."

AbsentFriends: EWreckedSean: AbsentFriends: The guy doing the bribing? Put him in jail.

There, problem fixed.

Not necessary to put the guys receiving the bribes in jail. That would just be completely over the top.

Ney went to jail. too.

1/535 isn't enough.

Duke Cunningham too 2/535,

/call me when we're at 534/535
//I like my rep

Get money out of politics. Do it soon, or we are done for.

whither_apophis: /call me when we're at 534/535
//I like my rep

Everyone likes their guy. It's always all the rest. That's why nothing ever gets fixed.

I saw him on 60 Minutes last night Everyone involved in the piece pissed me off.

Philip J. Fry: whither_apophis: /call me when we're at 534/535
//I like my rep

Everyone likes their guy. It's always all the rest. That's why nothing ever gets fixed.

We're supposed to not like our Senators though, right? Because mine seem like complete ass and slightly-less ass, respectively.

GhostFish: Get money out of politics. Do it soon, or we are done for.

It's not possible. It's like making drugs illegal. As long as there is a market for it, the laws will never stop it.

GhostFish: Get money out of politics. Do it soon, or we are done for.

The problem is that being a member of Congress, or a lobbyist, are jobs like any other - you get the paycheck in exchange for a service rendered, and you use that check to buy clothes, food, dildos, etc.

Money is in politics. It will never get out - from the Gilded Age and before, through Cardinal Richelieu-like popes, slavery, Robber Barons, Yellow Journalism, the Protest Era, Reaganomics, the S&L scandal, the Information Age...money is power, power corrupts.

Lobbying is also a Constitutionally-protected right, so you likely couldn't enact a restriction on becoming a lobbyist after having served on the Hill (as staffer or Congressional seat-warmer).

Better reporting (and mandatory disclosure) helps, I imagine, so long as we're having them report on everything, and setting huge fines/punishments for infringers. How about every office has an appointed Citizen Watchdog (appointed by the Majority or Minority leader from the opposite party) that follows the Congressperson for the entirety of their legislative duties? Failure to be within earshot of the "advisor" for a period longer than 15 minutes means automatic censure. Repeat violators, or anyone who willfully "loses" the advisor loses their seniority. Frivolous or excessively redundant/trumped-up complaints lodged by the advisor result in their termination (to prevent abuses).

At least I'm thinking. Problem is, all the "reform" efforts are voted on by Congresspeople (who like their gravy train), and scrutinized by lobbyists (who don't want to lose that influence) before any vote happens, so even getting a decent bill to the floor is like asking a CEO to take a pay cut. Then you've gotta get 218 Reps and 51 60 Senators. And make sure it's Free-Speech kosher.

Cue the "Man guilty of accepting bribes and siphoning billions gets 2 years, man who stole a $10 bill and returned it because he felt bad gets 30 years" picture.

EWreckedSean: It's not possible. It's like making drugs illegal. As long as there is a market for it, the laws will never stop it.

Kind of like terrorism.

Dr Dreidel: Money is in politics. It will never get out

Create an agency responsible for catching crap like TFA where the only route of advancement and prestige inside this agency itself is through extravagant success in their duties, or through catching internal corruption.
There would also need to be a system in place to make it such that anyone working in said agency would be constantly disenfranchising outside businesses and corporations, as to discourage hiring them in the first place.
Dereliction of duty would be punishable by foreclosure on all owned assets and jailtime.

But like all ideas, this one requires a bit of moral character so I guess it wouldn't work.

Does this mean Lobbyists are job creators?

//created their own jobs

So we should look at every piece of legislation with the same scrutiny right?


Well maybe not legislation pushed forward by democrats.....wait...maybe not republican legislation....

I forgot which side is bad.

I wonder how Solyndra fits into all this.

I know I know, nothing to see there, its just a witch hunt or because Obama is black.

Philip J. Fry: whither_apophis: /call me when we're at 534/535
//I like my rep

Everyone likes their guy. It's always all the rest. That's why nothing ever gets fixed.

I hate my guy. He's an orange idiot. The Ohio 8th has some sad, sad people.

I think the most surprising part of all this is that he thinks there's one or two congressman that aren't bought.

Giltric: So we should look at every piece of legislation with the same scrutiny right?


Well maybe not legislation pushed forward by democrats.....wait...maybe not republican legislation....

I forgot which side is bad.

I wonder how Solyndra fits into all this.

I know I know, nothing to see there, its just a witch hunt or because Obama is black.

Solyndra made solar panels.

Obama gave pretty much everybody who made solar panels government subsidies.

That's about it.

Gunny Highway: I saw him on 60 Minutes last night Everyone involved in the piece pissed me off.

Even the Key grip?

Giltric: daily dose of derp

Giltric: So we should look at every piece of legislation with the same scrutiny right?


Well maybe not legislation pushed forward by democrats.....wait...maybe not republican legislation....

I forgot which side is bad.

I wonder how Solyndra fits into all this.

I know I know, nothing to see there, its just a witch hunt or because Obama is black.

Personally, I can't wait for them to investigate Solyndra. Isn't the head of Solyndra a registered Republican? Why, yes, yes he is. Didn't he use a Republican lobbying firm? Yes, he did. Didn't lobby firm press the Bush White House to get things started? Yes, yes they did. Were the Walton family one of the largest private investors? Yes, yes they were. What about Gorge Kaiser? Nope not an investor. Was Solyndra's loan application filed during the Bush Administration? Yes, yes it was.

The investigation should be a good time for all. Of course, this will affect all speculative loans. We'll start to see comparisons of loans for different types of energy loans. We'll add in the cost of military protections for certain industries. It is going to be a hoot-and-a-half.

Dr Dreidel: GhostFish: Get money out of politics. Do it soon, or we are done for.

The problem is that being a member of Congress, or a lobbyist, are jobs like any other - you get the paycheck in exchange for a service rendered, and you use that check to buy clothes, food, dildos, etc.

Money is in politics. It will never get out - from the Gilded Age and before, through Cardinal Richelieu-like popes, slavery, Robber Barons, Yellow Journalism, the Protest Era, Reaganomics, the S&L scandal, the Information Age...money is power, power corrupts.

Lobbying is also a Constitutionally-protected right, so you likely couldn't enact a restriction on becoming a lobbyist after having served on the Hill (as staffer or Congressional seat-warmer).

Better reporting (and mandatory disclosure) helps, I imagine, so long as we're having them report on everything, and setting huge fines/punishments for infringers. How about every office has an appointed Citizen Watchdog (appointed by the Majority or Minority leader from the opposite party) that follows the Congressperson for the entirety of their legislative duties? Failure to be within earshot of the "advisor" for a period longer than 15 minutes means automatic censure. Repeat violators, or anyone who willfully "loses" the advisor loses their seniority. Frivolous or excessively redundant/trumped-up complaints lodged by the advisor result in their termination (to prevent abuses).

At least I'm thinking. Problem is, all the "reform" efforts are voted on by Congresspeople (who like their gravy train), and scrutinized by lobbyists (who don't want to lose that influence) before any vote happens, so even getting a decent bill to the floor is like asking a CEO to take a pay cut. Then you've gotta get 218 Reps and 51 60 Senators. And make sure it's Free-Speech kosher.

I'm inclined to think that the two-party system is a large part of the problem. It creates a constant horse race, where any sitting representative already knows that he will almost certainly have a well funded and strongly backed challenger in the next election, or that he very well could if he doesn't play his cards just right. That's beyond impetus to do his job and represent his constituents. It's impetus to constantly campaign, bring in as much money as possible, wine and dine, wheel and deal. It's a system where the intense level of competition brings out the worst in people and they find it all too easy to rationalize indiscretion.

DeaH: Giltric: So we should look at every piece of legislation with the same scrutiny right?


Well maybe not legislation pushed forward by democrats.....wait...maybe not republican legislation....

I forgot which side is bad.

I wonder how Solyndra fits into all this.

I know I know, nothing to see there, its just a witch hunt or because Obama is black.

Personally, I can't wait for them to investigate Solyndra. Isn't the head of Solyndra a registered Republican? Why, yes, yes he is. Didn't he use a Republican lobbying firm? Yes, he did. Didn't lobby firm press the Bush White House to get things started? Yes, yes they did. Were the Walton family one of the largest private investors? Yes, yes they were. What about Gorge Kaiser? Nope not an investor. Was Solyndra's loan application filed during the Bush Administration? Yes, yes it was.

The investigation should be a good time for all. Of course, this will affect all speculative loans. We'll start to see comparisons of loans for different types of energy loans. We'll add in the cost of military protections for certain industries. It is going to be a hoot-and-a-half.


Have you come across any information as to who approved or denied the loan cause that is more important then under what administration they filed their application with no matter how much energy you put into blaiming Bush.

DeaH: Personally, I can't wait for them to investigate Solyndra. Isn't the head of Solyndra a registered Republican? Why, yes, yes he is. Didn't he use a Republican lobbying firm? Yes, he did. Didn't lobby firm press the Bush White House to get things started? Yes, yes they did. Were the Walton family one of the largest private investors? Yes, yes they were. What about Gorge Kaiser? Nope not an investor. Was Solyndra's loan application filed during the Bush Administration? Yes, yes it was.

The investigation should be a good time for all.

You're imagining an "investigation" investigation. I don't think that's the kind that the House of Representatives has in mind.

Giltric: ave you come across any information as to who approved or denied the loan cause that is more important then under what administration they filed their application with no matter how much energy you put into blaiming Bush.

Have you come across any information that shows improper actions by anyone in either administration, or are we still going on the "Solyndra failed, therefore Obama bad" theory?

Giltric: DeaH: Giltric: So we should look at every piece of legislation with the same scrutiny right?


Well maybe not legislation pushed forward by democrats.....wait...maybe not republican legislation....

I forgot which side is bad.

I wonder how Solyndra fits into all this.

I know I know, nothing to see there, its just a witch hunt or because Obama is black.

Personally, I can't wait for them to investigate Solyndra. Isn't the head of Solyndra a registered Republican? Why, yes, yes he is. Didn't he use a Republican lobbying firm? Yes, he did. Didn't lobby firm press the Bush White House to get things started? Yes, yes they did. Were the Walton family one of the largest private investors? Yes, yes they were. What about Gorge Kaiser? Nope not an investor. Was Solyndra's loan application filed during the Bush Administration? Yes, yes it was.

The investigation should be a good time for all. Of course, this will affect all speculative loans. We'll start to see comparisons of loans for different types of energy loans. We'll add in the cost of military protections for certain industries. It is going to be a hoot-and-a-half.


Have you come across any information as to who approved or denied the loan cause that is more important then under what administration they filed their application with no matter how much energy you put into blaiming Bush.

So, creating the nice, shiny package and filling it with a turd is less important the the person who opens it? Huh, that seems a little off. Although you do have a sort of a point. No one should ever trust anything that comes from the Republicans. You have to ding anyone who is dumb enough to do that.

Skleenar: DeaH: Personally, I can't wait for them to investigate Solyndra. Isn't the head of Solyndra a registered Republican? Why, yes, yes he is. Didn't he use a Republican lobbying firm? Yes, he did. Didn't lobby firm press the Bush White House to get things started? Yes, yes they did. Were the Walton family one of the largest private investors? Yes, yes they were. What about Gorge Kaiser? Nope not an investor. Was Solyndra's loan application filed during the Bush Administration? Yes, yes it was.

The investigation should be a good time for all.

You're imagining an "investigation" investigation. I don't think that's the kind that the House of Representatives has in mind.

There is no mind in the House of Representatives. That's why I would really LOVE for them to start this snowball rolling. They will have no idea that it's heading right for them.

Skleenar: Giltric: ave you come across any information as to who approved or denied the loan cause that is more important then under what administration they filed their application with no matter how much energy you put into blaiming Bush.

Have you come across any information that shows improper actions by anyone in either administration, or are we still going on the "Solyndra failed, therefore Obama bad" theory?

Yes I have....it seems that one administration didn't think it would be a good idea to loan this company money and another administration did. It also seemed to have taken years for one administration to go through the info and deny the application for a govenrment loan....and only days for another administration to approve it.

It seems like one administration hadn't done their due dilligence. Do you have info that conflicts with mine?

Philip J. Fry: whither_apophis: /call me when we're at 534/535
//I like my rep

Everyone likes their guy. It's always all the rest. That's why nothing ever gets fixed.

I don't like mine. At all.

So if I take a ton of money, drop it on you and squish you with it, since money is free speech I can't be tried for murder?

gunsmack: I think he means that weren't bought by him.

You'd think that, but he mentioned how he (personally) only had coverage of less than half of the whole shebang.

EWreckedSean: GhostFish: Get money out of politics. Do it soon, or we are done for.

It's not possible. It's like making drugs illegal. As long as there is a market for it, the laws will never stop it.

IDK, policing 535 people who mostly hang out in one spot is probably easier than policing 300 million people spread across 3.8 million square miles. Even easier at the local level with quarterly audits for the dozen or so elected officials in each district.

Or: Public campaign financing. No impetus to gather obscene quantities of money for a warchest. Every candidate who meets the registration requirements gets an equal cut of the public fund. Go to town. Let the best man win. Why take an extra $100k when your personal finances are scrutinized and you can't just launder the money through your campaign coffers?

LectertheChef: Philip J. Fry: whither_apophis: /call me when we're at 534/535
//I like my rep

Everyone likes their guy. It's always all the rest. That's why nothing ever gets fixed.

I don't like mine. At all.

I don't really care one way or the other for mine. I just know that if I don't keep electing mine, he'll keep getting his paycheck either way. Might as well keep him up there so nobody else gets handouts.

Giltric: Skleenar: Giltric: ave you come across any information as to who approved or denied the loan cause that is more important then under what administration they filed their application with no matter how much energy you put into blaiming Bush.

Have you come across any information that shows improper actions by anyone in either administration, or are we still going on the "Solyndra failed, therefore Obama bad" theory?

Yes I have....it seems that one administration didn't think it would be a good idea to loan this company money and another administration did. It also seemed to have taken years for one administration to go through the info and deny the application for a govenrment loan....and only days for another administration to approve it.

It seems like one administration hadn't done their due dilligence. Do you have info that conflicts with mine?

The Bush admin made a concerted effort to push the loan through in their last days but were unable to complete it. The Obama folks simply completed the last few steps.

There is ZERO evidence that the Bush folks had any hesitation about doing the loan. Where did you get that idea?

This is me, surprised there isn't more in this thread.
I mean, isn't this part of what OWS is about? I expect more chatter, at least about both sides being bad so vote populist and all that...