Sunday, January 24, 2010

Corruption is protected by The Constitution

If a Governor accepts money to look favorably on a supplicant's plea for sympathetic legislation, it is called corruption and a jail sentence is imposed. If a U.S. Senator accepts money to look favorably on a supplicant's plea for sympathetic legislation it is called a constitutionally protected right of free speech and the champagne is popped. First Massachusetts, and now this. These Republicans will not rest until we declare this the United States of Shame.

Only connect, my friends! 
Cheers, 
Charles Shaughnessy

4 comments:

  1. It's not just Republicans; members of both parties are equally to blame. One of the most corrupt (if not the most corrupt) member of Congress is a Democrat, Representative John Murtha of Pennsylvania, who chairs the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee. His ties to a defense contractor who is currently being investigated by the government and to defense executives convicted of skimming money from defense contracts certainly do not reflect the good character we want to see in our elected representatives (and perhaps can be construed as bribery if he received campaign contributions in exchange for favoritism in awarding federal contracts). Besides, one of the most egregious examples of including pork in the health care bill passed by the Senate was made by Nebraska Senator Ben Nelson (a Democrat); certainly Senator Reid and the rest of the Democratic leaders effectively sold their souls to get the bill passed through the Senate (a bill that does not stand a chance of being approved by the House--and it's not just because of the Republicans). Both parties are equally to blame, and maybe it's time to go to the polls this spring (in the primaries) and this fall in the general elections and elect representatives and senators who truly understand what the nation needs, not what's best for their own interests--regardless of party affiliation. After all, the Democratic Party of today is a lot like the Republican Party of the late 19th century (and the Republicans of today are strikingly similar to the party formed by Thomas Jefferson in the late 18th century)...

    ReplyDelete
  2. Sigh. If you'd read online or ask what "those Republicans"(the real people) think, you'd find that we don't like the corporate influence any more than you do. It's obscene, but it's also been going on for ages. The SCOTUS ruling was actually constitutionally correct....prior justices had already ruled that #1 Corporations have the same legal rights as a person, as specified in the Constitution.(I hate that, but it's what they decided, and no I don't think it's what the Founding Fathers intended) and #2 Money is a form of free speech(again, frustrating and probably has Jefferson spinning in his grave). So, based on those 2 rules already on the books, a "corporation" has the right to "free speech". People have the right to "free assembly" in groups, and that's what unions and corporations are(supposedly). It's twisted, but it's reality. And many Americans would rather err on the side of freedom and free speech, lest they be the next ones in line.
    That said...it's not "those Republicans". If the past year has taught us nothing, it's that the Democrats are JUST as much in bed with the corporations as the Republicans. Again, go back to David's blogs or read the comments section on Huffington Post. I have watched staunch Obama supporters angry beyond description, to finally realize that Obama is as much a part of the corporatocracy as the rest of them. The Democrats pulling this "The mean Repubs want corporations to run the show, but we Dems are for you people" bit is a pretty big pile of male bovine excrement. It's ok to be upset that the corporations are able to influence politicians, but for God's sake, don't act all self-righteous that your hands are clean. Check out the lobby donations online and see how the front runners are.
    And....the corporations do not get a VOTE. The people vote, so technically, all of the bells and whistles purchased to advertise a politician shouldn't matter....IF the people do their homework.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Even if it is said "corporation backing shouldn't matter...if people do there homework". The thing is the majority of people don't do there "homework" before they vote, they vote based off Campaign propaganda and sometimes even who looks better. So Corporations being able to back any politician with as much money as they want, that is basically a vote or as close to one as they will get before actually signing a ballot. If this happens, with all the money and propaganda floating around the majority of people who don't do their homework are basically brainwashed into voting for someone who will benefit the corporation rather than the people who actually need someone to represent THEM. I know this basically happens already, but if this passes it will be a free for all, the ones ultimately screwed are the people, and the country it self. The people for not doing their homework and letting themselves be lead by propaganda and the country for the leaders who most certainly will end up Ruining it(more than it is now). Our Founding fathers wanted this country to be for the people, by the people. It saddens me that the people forget that their vote is their voice, and they are going to use the peoples voice to their(corporation)benefit and not the peoples needs/Benefit.

    Peace and love
    -Mel

    ReplyDelete
  4. You are very wise to point out the corruptions in our government. A lot of people don't even see that and think everything is fine and dandy. Well corruption is (like the other comments) not limited to one party, and this has certainly not the first case of it. Speaker of the House Henry Clay pursuaded votes because Andrew Jackson, won popular and electoral college votes but didn't have te necessary majority to become president. So Henry Clay convinced the House to vote for John Quincy Adams, causing the people of America to scream "corrupt bargain" from the top of their lungs. Well and even though this wasn't the first time the House decided an election, Henry Clay should have let Jackson win it, because Henry himself came in 4th place (my history teacher days always the bridesmaid and never the bride). Well once Jackson was elected he fired all the federal employees and hired his own and made them say good things about him, who cares about the work? Seems like the political machine was
    really corrupt. Well and it never went away too, since the Boss Tweed and Tammany Hall were not too long after that. The point is that we've had corrupt government all along, and not many people either see it, or care. The people that actually wanted to do something were the Populists, which eventually led to the Progressives. They contributed to civil service reform...though it didn't fix the
    problem. What bothers me is that these corruptions are obvious, and no one cares enough to fix it. Personally I think the president should "fire" anyone who is that corrupt, though that would be giving the president more power, and I think as much power that is trusted in the people is better. So we the people should call someone on it, no matter what party they come from, or what their reputation is. If more Americans are on the ball about this sort of corruption then we could fix it. But I feel that there is so much corruption not only in the legislative government but in the federal and local too. It would take a lot of effort to get rid of it all, but I think it would lead us all to a much better, happier, place then we are now.

    ReplyDelete

Charles Shaughnessy on YouTube

Loading...

Followers

Charles Shaughnessy visitors

Total Pageviews