have institutionalized and professionalized corruption to such an extent that it has become a corporate rip-off of the American people (Halliburton, Enron, Savings and Loan Scandal, etc.)
2006-11-07 01:30:11 · 19 answers · asked by Zelda Hunter 7 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Democratic nepotism? Have you not seen the statistics on the people Bush appointed? The largest percentage of people that have no prior qualifications in the field were appointed by Bush because he knew them in Texas or were relatives of others.
blatant plagarism follows:
Vice President Dick Cheney's son-in-law, Philip Perry, has been named deputy attorney general. Secretary of State Colin Powell's son, Michael Powell, is the chairman of the Federal Communications Commission. Powell was appointed to the FCC by President Clinton in 1997 and elevated to chairman earlier this year. Bush also re-appointed him to another term on the commission, until 2007.
Budget Director Mitchell Daniels' sister, Deborah, has been appointed assistant attorney general. Deputy White House press secretary Scott McClellan's brother is on the president's Council of Economic Advisers.
The brother of White House political director Ken Mehlman -- Bruce -- is an assistant secretary of commerce.
In the broader Republican family, relatives of Chief Justice William Rehnquist and Justice Antonin Scalia also have been picked for plum posts in the Bush administration. Janet Rehnquist is the inspector general of the Department of Health and Human Services, and Eugene Scalia is solicitor general at the Labor Department. He was one of Bush's attorneys when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of the then-Republican presidential candidate in the Florida election case.
2006-11-07 01:37:17 · answer #1 · answered by RJ 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Neither-- It's individuals not parties that are corrupt. Overall there is corruption in both parties. There are good Democrats and Republicans and bad ones as well. The problem is neither party wants to hammer the wrongdoers because to bring them to light is to provide ammo for the other side.
You blame the Republicans for the S&L and Enron. I wonder why? Was it the fault of the Republican party or was it caused by some people who happened to be Republicans?
Halliburton could do the job but over billed. Over billing was wrong and got caught. What firm related to Democrats could even come close to doing the job.
As far as I'm concerned when it comes to public officials there is no such thing as a minor violation.
2006-11-07 10:16:45 · answer #2 · answered by namsaev 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I do not agree with the premise of your question. Elected Democrats have committed major crimes while in office. Dan Rostenkowski was ousted for taking money from the House of Representatives. William Jefferson, D, Louisiana had $90,000 in cold cash in his freezer when Katrina flooded New Orleans. Jack Murtha, D, PA was an unindicted co-conspirator in the Abscam sting. His voice is on tape, saying he would not take a bribe "at this time."
Your examples of corruption are not valid. Halliburton was never charged with any crimes. Enron officers have been sent to jail, and none of those convicted were elected Republicans. Further, their crimes went on during the Clinton administration. The discovery and convictions went on during the current Bush Administration.
Those involved in the Savings and Loan crimes were prosecuted. These were not crimes committed by elected Republicans working in their capacity as legislators.
There were easily-identifiable shady dealings that went on all the time during the Clinton Administration.
How about Martha Stewart and Imclone? She was not an elected Republican official at the time of her conviction.
2006-11-07 09:45:51 · answer #3 · answered by regerugged 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Only because they're in power. Don't forget Jim Wright, or Huey Long, or the Daleys of Chicago. Henry Cisneros (Clintons HUD guy.)
The Republicans just happen to be the party-in-power. Power corrupts.
A good cleaning-out is needed every few years. I think the Republicans will benefit from a few years in the hinter-lands. But I'm not so naive to believe that in 10 years we won't be seeing the same abuses from Democrats.
2006-11-07 09:34:31 · answer #4 · answered by itsnotarealname 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
There are good and bad in both parties!
It's the power that corrupts, not the division of democrat and republican. That's why you have to really hone into the platforms and debates to watch for the body language of lying at the same time trying to understand if they are actually saying anything worth merit.
2006-11-07 09:34:38 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Any time a single party is in power to long, they become corrupt.
Republicans took 10 years to get to the coruption level they were at in 54'
Democrats took 40 years to get to where they were at in 94'
Republicans took 8 years to get to the corruption level they are today
see a pattern!
2006-11-07 09:37:58 · answer #6 · answered by Anarchy99 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
well, the above mentioned scandals....lets see...who was president when all that was going on for years and became so corrupt i could smell it at the north pole and who became president and CLEANED UP THE MESS?
i have a nice list of democrat transgressions, that means, an infringement or violation of law, if you would like to see them. i do assure you, the list is long and impressive.
2006-11-07 09:39:19 · answer #7 · answered by afterflakes 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
What was more a corruption of Christianity: the American Revolution or the American Civil War? Why should slavery have been abolished?
2006-11-07 09:34:25 · answer #8 · answered by mouthbreather77 1 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Both parties are the same government breeds corruption that is the nature of politics and government it's all about who can control what and whom!
2006-11-07 09:33:15 · answer #9 · answered by no one here gets out alive 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Just the Clintons are more corrupt than all other political parties. Add in the rest and the dems are nothing but swine.
2006-11-07 09:34:31 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋