Members georgestrings Posted January 13, 2008 Members Share Posted January 13, 2008 http://www.judicialwatch.org/judicial-watch-announces-list-washington-s-ten-most-wanted-corrupt-politicians-2007 Judicial Watch Announces List of Washington Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members ToeJamFootball Posted January 13, 2008 Members Share Posted January 13, 2008 Awesome Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members t3ch Posted January 13, 2008 Members Share Posted January 13, 2008 Oof, got 4 major candidates on there. I like sites like this. I wish I could find the site I came across awhile ago with a listing of all the sex scandals involving both reps/dems. The thing was like 4 pages long Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members dragon9666 Posted January 13, 2008 Members Share Posted January 13, 2008 #"s 9 and 10 should be moved up, imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members lug Posted January 13, 2008 Members Share Posted January 13, 2008 #"s 9 and 10 should be moved up, imo. They are alphabetical Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members t3ch Posted January 13, 2008 Members Share Posted January 13, 2008 They are alphabetical Then they should change their names. Jesus Lug, it's like you don't know anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members NeonVomit Posted January 13, 2008 Members Share Posted January 13, 2008 Oh noes! Politicians are corrupt? Who would've ever thought! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members dravenzouk Posted January 13, 2008 Members Share Posted January 13, 2008 What lightweight crap. There are serious concerns with all these folks, but cute little lists like this do nothing to actually delve into problems that really matter. It's all just another bunch of "let's hate politicians we don't like, just because, well, we hate them, you know?" Since most of you think of me as one of those {censored} libruls, I will defend two of the Repubs/cons in this thing. Huckabee. The facts against him here are "14 complaints" and a "volley of questions". Ooooh, how damning! People have actually questioned him about ethics now that he is "experiencing a meteoric rise in the polls"! That's it, he must be terribly corrupt, certainly in the top ten, if people are actually questioning him. And then he refused to cooperate - unheard of behavior from a politician facing allegations! Libby. This isn't exactly defending him, but more having issue with this list. Ok, there is no question anywhere that Scooter is a corrupt piece of sh*t, and deserving of all the scorn we can rain down on him. But this list is about the top ten. And let's face it, Libby was most likely acting under orders from his superiors; and if that is true than they would by definition be more corrupt than he. And you would probably expect them to "let him off the hook" for his crimes, seeing as he was just following orders like a good little soldier. And sure enough, the listing tells us how Bush, unfortunately, afforded him "executive clemency" and commuted the sentence. Just because. Even though a high court of law found him guilty of very serious crimes (serious enough for the Judicial Review to think he deserves a top ten spot for committing). But somehow, the makers of this list feel that the inhabitants of the Oval Office don't deserve to be on the list, that their crime was really just a "lack of judgement". Uh, right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Brother Mango Posted January 13, 2008 Members Share Posted January 13, 2008 What lightweight crap. **SNIP** QUOTE] dravenzouk, it's not even worth your time. The organization describes itself as "conservative." So, it's going to attack democrats and feckless republicans who are an embarassment. Moreover, I've figured out that georgestrings is really George W. Bush. He thought he was super clever in changing his last name to strings. Don't be inflamed by his nonsense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members lug Posted January 13, 2008 Members Share Posted January 13, 2008 What lightweight crap.I will defend two of the Repubs/cons in this thing. It's great when someone finally sees the light. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members dravenzouk Posted January 13, 2008 Members Share Posted January 13, 2008 It's great when someone finally sees the right.Fixed it for ya, dz. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members FreestyleIntruder Posted January 13, 2008 Members Share Posted January 13, 2008 Oh noes! Politicians are corrupt? Who would've ever thought! Yeah, Judicial Watch wins the Nobel Prize for 'Stating the Obvious' Next week, a JW exclusive - Pope {censored}s in Woods Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members der oxenrig Posted January 13, 2008 Members Share Posted January 13, 2008 Where's Martin O'Malley? Oh wait, he already has a website dedicated to watching him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members BlueEcho811 Posted January 13, 2008 Members Share Posted January 13, 2008 career has also been colored by 14 ethics complaints and a volley of questions about his integrity, ranging from his management of campaign cash to his use of a nonprofit organization to subsidize his income to his destruction of state computer files on his way out of the governor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Thumper Posted January 13, 2008 Members Share Posted January 13, 2008 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members King Kashue Posted January 13, 2008 Members Share Posted January 13, 2008 dravenzouk, it's not even worth your time. The organization describes itself as "conservative." So, it's going to attack democrats and feckless republicans who are an embarassment. It's nice that you base your conclusion on a single statement, instead of their actual actions...That really shows the amount of research and thought you've put into it. Good job They've criticized the Bush administration on its Guest worker program, They've filed a lawsuit against Dick Cheney for his Halliburton accounting practices, they filed a lawsuit against the DoJ to have Pentagon security films released from 9/11, They sued Cheney again for not releasing the minutes of his "Energy Task force", They released FBI documents regarding the flight of Saudi nationals following the 9/11 attacks, they sued the secret service for information regarding Jack Abramoff's visits to the Bush White House. They're not 'yes men' to the Bush administration. They're "conservative" in the traditional sense of opposing governmental excesses, no matter which side of the isle they come from. Do they have a mission (and corresponding bias)? Of course, everyone is biased...And in that they are certainly more likely to favor Republicans than Democrats (since the traditional Republican stance matches their philosophies, though the Neo-Con stance doesn't), however to dismiss them as unwilling to criticize certain elements displays a relatively complete lack of knowledge of their actions... I.e., They've brought multiple legal actions against the Bush White House, to decry them as nothing more than puppets of the Republican party leadership shows you don't know much about them at all... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members boogiebassbill Posted January 13, 2008 Members Share Posted January 13, 2008 where's O.J. ?????????????? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members NeonVomit Posted January 13, 2008 Members Share Posted January 13, 2008 where's O.J. ?????????????? If someone like him actually gets elected to office in America, then you fully deserve everything the Russians will do to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members boogiebassbill Posted January 13, 2008 Members Share Posted January 13, 2008 If someone like him actually gets elected to office in America, then you fully deserve everything the Russians will do to you.believe me, if he ran for any office.......he would get the black vote.:cool: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members georgestrings Posted January 14, 2008 Author Members Share Posted January 14, 2008 Where are Cheney, Bush, Rumsfeld and the cronies? That list = fail. Feel free to show some examples of their transgressions - otherwise, it's just sour grapes liberal whining... I'll note that you didn't make ANY effort to disprove any of the allegations - just blatted away with the "HEY!!! - Look over there!!! routine... how predictable... - georgestrings Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members King Kashue Posted January 14, 2008 Members Share Posted January 14, 2008 Feel free to show some examples of their transgressions - otherwise, it's just sour grapes liberal whining... Well, Judicial watch has sued them a half a dozen times already, so I assume those count Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members georgestrings Posted January 14, 2008 Author Members Share Posted January 14, 2008 Well, Judicial watch has sued them a half a dozen times already, so I assume those count Unsuccessfully, though - right??? 'course, some here would have you believe that Judicial Watch is only scrutinizing the Left - thanks for pointing out the error in that thinking... - georgestrings Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members King Kashue Posted January 14, 2008 Members Share Posted January 14, 2008 Unsuccessfully, though - right??? Nope. Either the administration chose to give over the info or the court ordered them to when they refused. I don't think JW has been denied info (though I'd need to look to make sure). As for the Corruption of the Administration, the list you gave includes 'Scooter' and mentions Bush for granting clemency to such a blatant criminal... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members georgestrings Posted January 14, 2008 Author Members Share Posted January 14, 2008 Nope. Either the administration chose to give over the info or the court ordered them to when they refused. I don't think JW has been denied info (though I'd need to look to make sure).As for the Corruption of the Administration, the list you gave includes 'Scooter' and mentions Bush for granting clemency to such a blatant criminal... Thanks for the info - I'll be the 1st to admit that I didn't know one way or the other... As for the list I posted, I highly doubt that a single item on it can be disproved - I don't think JW would risk their asses like that, if those claims couldn't be substantiated... - georgestrings Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members King Kashue Posted January 14, 2008 Members Share Posted January 14, 2008 Thanks for the info - I'll be the 1st to admit that I didn't know one way or the other... As for the list I posted, I highly doubt that a single item on it can be disproved - I don't think JW would risk their asses like that, if those claims couldn't be substantiated... - georgestrings It is correct, that's the point. Scooter is a Bush administration figure and Bush granted him clemency from facing the consequences of his multiple convictions. That plus Ambramoff is plenty of corruption within the administration itself (which is what you were asking for)... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.