Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Illinois: The Most Corrupt State in the USA.

Options
2»

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,804 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    JohnMc1 wrote: »
    We're talking about the Kennedy family here. She'll just open the checkbook again.
    I actually laughed out loud. She's being criticised for not being corrupt enough, and you manage to turn it into an accusation of corruption against her.

    I can't imagine ever being that partisan, I really can't.


  • Options
    #33
    JohnMc1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,987 ✭✭✭JohnMc1


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    I actually laughed out loud. She's being criticised for not being corrupt enough, and you manage to turn it into an accusation of corruption against her.

    I can't imagine ever being that partisan, I really can't.

    As a Democratic supporter you should be disgusted at the notion of the Dem Party trying to sell Hillary's seat in the middle of the Blagoevich scandal. Not trying to take shots at the Conservative poster on here.


  • Options
    #34
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,804 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    JohnMc1 wrote: »
    As a Democratic supporter...
    I'm a Democratic supporter? When did that happen? I live in Ireland.
    ...you should be disgusted at the notion of the Dem Party trying to sell Hillary's seat in the middle of the Blagoevich scandal.
    I don't think the party is trying to sell her seat - certainly not the way Blagojevich was blatantly and explicitly doing. I can see how it's possible to take something out of context and force a strained parallel, but I also think it's a pretty shabby thing to do.

    But again, if all you care about is scoring points at any cost, keep raking.
    Not trying to take shots at the Conservative poster on here.
    I'm not taking shots at you, I'm taking shots at your transparent attempts to sling as much mud as you can rake up at any Democratic target that heaves into view. I find blind partisanship in equal parts funny and disturbing.


  • Options
    #35
    JohnMc1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,987 ✭✭✭JohnMc1


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    I don't think the party is trying to sell her seat - certainly not the way Blagojevich was blatantly and explicitly doing. I can see how it's possible to take something out of context and force a strained parallel, but I also think it's a pretty shabby thing to do.

    All that time to come up with that? :rolleyes:
    They're claiming they're not giving her the seat because she didn't donate enough money to the Party. You would have to be a card carrying idiot to not to see the similarities.

    Its like renaming the amnesty plan the Pathway to Citizenship. Same thing just worded differently.
    But again, if all you care about is scoring points at any cost, keep raking. I'm not taking shots at you, I'm taking shots at your transparent attempts to sling as much mud as you can rake up at any Democratic target that heaves into view. I find blind partisanship in equal parts funny and disturbing.

    :rolleyes::rolleyes:


  • Options
    #36
    Manic Moran
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 16,401 Mod ✭✭✭✭Manic Moran


    So basically, you're commending Kennedy for not being a party to corruption?

    I'm not condemning Kennedy for trying to buy a seat. I'm condemning Kennedy for thinking that all you really need to do to become a Senator is to change your name back to Kennedy and make a few 'phone calls, relying on the name brand alone. I mean, really.
    Caroline wrote:
    I was really surprised and dismayed by my voting record," she told the Associated Press. "I'm glad it's been brought to my attention.

    Really? She's that interested in politics that she has no idea how often she voted?

    On the other hand I'm condeming the Democrat Party for worrying about how much someone has contributed before seating them.

    NTM


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    JohnMc1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,987 ✭✭✭JohnMc1


    Manic Moran wrote: »
    I'm not condemning Kennedy for trying to buy a seat. I'm condemning Kennedy for thinking that all you really need to do to become a Senator is to change your name back to Kennedy and make a few 'phone calls, relying on the name brand alone. I mean, really.



    Really? She's that interested in politics that she has no idea how often she voted?

    On the other hand I'm condeming the Democrat Party for worrying about how much someone has contributed before seating them.

    NTM

    She also claimed that 9/11 and Obama winning were the reasons she sought to replace Clinton in the Senate. Someone should tell her that she is 7 years too late to use 9/11 as an alleged motivation. If 9/11 really touched her she would have done something then not wait 7 years.


  • Options
    #38
    Dob74
    Registered Users Posts: 1,049 ✭✭✭Dob74


    Rented Mule wrote: »
    As someone who was born and raised on the southside of Chicago, and grew up within gthe constructs of Democratic machine politics, it would not surpirse me of this accusation.

    If jom Edgar had not resigned as Governor, this should have been three consecutive Illinois governors that would have been/will be sent to prison.

    Chicago Mayor Richard Daley is the next one in line to fall. He has been running unchecked for years now.


    I taught Edgar finished his two terms.
    Obama will move Fitzgerald before he can get Daley. Daley's to cute to get caught.
    Go Sox


  • Options
    #39
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,804 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    Manic Moran wrote: »
    I'm not condemning Kennedy for trying to buy a seat. I'm condemning Kennedy for thinking that all you really need to do to become a Senator is to change your name back to Kennedy and make a few 'phone calls, relying on the name brand alone. I mean, really.

    ...

    On the other hand I'm condeming the Democrat Party for worrying about how much someone has contributed before seating them.
    I'm not disagreeing with you. I'm simply expressing amusement at JohnMc1's rather transparent attempts to compare Kennedy to Blagojevich.


  • Options
    #40
    JohnMc1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,987 ✭✭✭JohnMc1


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    I'm not disagreeing with you. I'm simply expressing amusement at JohnMc1's rather transparent attempts to compare Kennedy to Blagojevich.

    If you were as intelligent as you like to think you would realize I was comparing the SITUATIONS.


  • Options
    #41
    Black Swan
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 47,258 CMod ✭✭✭✭Black Swan


    JohnMc1 wrote: »
    I am. Are you? If there were campaign finance reform chances are Obama might not have won.
    I am absolutely for campaign finance reform, but it will never happen in a system that values money over its people, currently laying them off in droves during the economic meltdown in the USA, while AIG executives go to the Marriott resort in So Cal spending $400,000 in tax-funded bailout monies, $23,000 on massages. This whole materialistic mentality of blowing bailout monies and buying politicians with millions in campaign "donations" is consistent with the notion that the USA political system is corrupted.

    I find it ironic that you single out Obama in your comment, as if McCain or any of the of the politicians running for high office were innocent (Republicans or Democrats). McCain may have failed to draw as much money as Obama, but he (or his PACs) still accepted hundreds of millions, so he was corrupted too, just not as successful at fund raising as Obama. Corrupt is corrupt, or are you going to suggest that McCain was only half as corrupted by special interest millions, because he got about half the millions that Obama got, which is a nonsensical argument? That's like someone claiming that they are only half-preggers (i.e., only half-corrupt). Special interests, like the oil lobby, do not give millions to candidates without expecting anything in return... So both McCain and Obama were selling their offices to special interests if elected, just not as obvious as the Governor of Illinois when attempting to sell Obama's seat.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    Manic Moran
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 16,401 Mod ✭✭✭✭Manic Moran


    currently laying them off in droves during the economic meltdown in the USA, while AIG executives go to the Marriott resort in So Cal spending $400,000 in tax-funded bailout monies, $23,000 on massages.

    Hang on, isn't that a good thing? You've got money coming back into the California economy, helping provide employment to all those Marriott employees and masseurs etc. I seem to recall that Marriott were doing layoffs as well, that should buy a bit more time for a few more jobs.

    NTM


  • Options
    #43
    JohnMc1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,987 ✭✭✭JohnMc1


    Blue_Lagoon wrote: »
    I am absolutely for campaign finance reform, but it will never happen in a system that values money over its people, currently laying them off in droves during the economic meltdown in the USA, while AIG executives go to the Marriott resort in So Cal spending $400,000 in tax-funded bailout monies, $23,000 on massages. This whole materialistic mentality of blowing bailout monies and buying politicians with millions in campaign "donations" is consistent with the notion that the USA political system is corrupted.

    I find it ironic that you single out Obama in your comment, as if McCain or any of the of the politicians running for high office were innocent (Republicans or Democrats). McCain may have failed to draw as much money as Obama, but he (or his PACs) still accepted hundreds of millions, so he was corrupted too, just not as successful at fund raising as Obama. Corrupt is corrupt, or are you going to suggest that McCain was only half as corrupted by special interest millions, because he got about half the millions that Obama got, which is a nonsensical argument? That's like someone claiming that they are only half-preggers (i.e., only half-corrupt). Special interests, like the oil lobby, do not give millions to candidates without expecting anything in return... So both McCain and Obama were selling their offices to special interests if elected, just not as obvious as the Governor of Illinois when attempting to sell Obama's seat.

    The reason I mentioned Obama is because he got a ton of undisclosed money for his campaign. He found a loophole that people can give up to $200 and not disclose their identity. This is ironic because he is making he Clinton's disclose their finances.


  • Options
    #44
    Black Swan
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 47,258 CMod ✭✭✭✭Black Swan


    Manic Moran wrote: »
    Hang on, isn't that a good thing? You've got money coming back into the California economy, helping provide employment to all those Marriott employees and masseurs etc. I seem to recall that Marriott were doing layoffs as well, that should buy a bit more time for a few more jobs.
    Look out Jay Leno! You have serious competition from JWM!


  • Options
    #45
    Pocono Joe
    Closed Accounts Posts: 795 ✭✭✭Pocono Joe


    There are some similarities in “situations” between the Blagojevich and Kennedy scenarios. Gov. Patterson is an unknown because he is not an elected governor, he rose to the spot with the resignation of Spitzer, aka "Client-9" (D). He does not have the recognition or clout necessary to play the political game of getting necessary funding for his state - which is reeling from a policy of economic absurdity. He needs help from Obama to get desperately needed federal funds to make up a bad situation in their state’s budget. And Kennedy is Obama’s choice for the position. So if Patterson appoints (anoints) Kennedy to the US Senate, he essentially has sold the job for the good of his state. The difference here is, although similar in contempt, Blagojevich’s motives were personal, while Patterson’s were public.
    Blue_Lagoon wrote: »
    McCain may have failed to draw as much money as Obama, but he (or his PACs) still accepted hundreds of millions, so he was corrupted too, just not as successful at fund raising as Obama.

    You’re kidding right?

    - - - - - - -

    I considered skewering Kennedy over the “you know’s" and "um’s," like Sarah Palin was skewered here, but thought better of it... Caroline Kennedy is a good person – just not qualified for the position. I guess Conservatives just have more class.


  • Options
    #46
    JohnMc1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,987 ✭✭✭JohnMc1


    Blago ain't going quietly.

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2008/12/30/blagojevich-reportedly-replacement-obamas-senate-seat/

    Personally I think Roland Burris has got to be the biggest idiot walking the planet for accepting knowing full well the Dem Party will not confirm anyone Blago appoints.


  • Options
    #47
    Manic Moran
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 16,401 Mod ✭✭✭✭Manic Moran


    He wasn't likely to get it through normal channels, what had he to lose?

    I like they way they brought a Black Power advocate from years past in to proclaim that if anyone didn't want to seat Burris, they were racist.

    NTM


  • Options
    #48
    Black Swan
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 47,258 CMod ✭✭✭✭Black Swan


    Pocono Joe wrote: »
    You’re kidding right?
    You finally figured that out after all these months?;)


  • Options
    #49
    JohnMc1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,987 ✭✭✭JohnMc1


    Manic Moran wrote: »
    He wasn't likely to get it through normal channels, what had he to lose?

    I like they way they brought a Black Power advocate from years past in to proclaim that if anyone didn't want to seat Burris, they were racist.

    NTM

    He's going to get dragged though the mud now. I'm sure the media will be ready to ask him how much he paid for the seat. He's now in the middle of this mess and more than likely end up with nothing to show for it.

    Blacks playing the race card? I'm shocked :rolleyes::rolleyes:


Advertisement