Are Democrats as bought-off as the Republicans?

[Quequeg]

Earlier in the year, when the Jack Abramoff scandal was still in the news, Larry King interviewed those famous reporters that uncovered Watergate: Bob Woodward, Carl Bernstein.

To coin a phrase, Carl Bernstein gave "a purty long sarmon for a chap that rips a little now and then".

Larry: Carl, what is going on.

Carl: The system is corrupt, thoroughly corrupt. It's become corroded. The legislative system in the Congress and the state legislatures is subject only to money. And what the Founder's intended to be a citizen legislature is an oligarchal legislature today. It is a plutocratic legislature today. Unless money is involved, forget about the public good. And if money is involved, forget about the public good. The system isn't working. It's not about Jack Abramoff. He's just the example of what happens when you take it as far as it can go in terms of how toxic it can become and how the evil of what happens when money determines what goes on in our political system. Abramoff is reflective of it. It goes all through this administration. It goes all through the other administrations. Who's in the White House doesn't matter ultimately. It's the Congress of the U.S. and they're no longer responsive to the people. They're responsive to money.

Here are some other quotes along the same theme:

http://www.tompaine.com/articles/2005/11/07/alan_greenspan_egalitarian.php">Alan Greenspan, Egalitarian?
http://www.tompaine.com/articles/2006/10/18/a_question_of_power.php">A Question of Power
If we do ignore inequality, Greenspan himself believes we will pay a high price. “As I've often said,” the Fed chair told the congressional Joint Economic Committee this past June, “this is not the type of thing which a democratic society—a capitalist democratic society—can really accept without addressing.”

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/4164784/">Reich’s Reprimand
We now have more national income and national wealth concentrated in fewer hands than we’ve had since the gilded age of the late nineteenth century. This poses a fundamental threat to democracy.

http://www.thinkingpeace.com/Lib/lib017.html">Wealth And Our Commonwealth
http://progressiveliving.org/oligarchy_defined.htm">Oligarchy may be defined succinctly as "rule by the few", often by the wealthy few.
Adams believed that when "economic power became concentrated in a few hands, then political power flowed to those possessors and away from the citizens, ultimately resulting in an oligarchy or tyranny."

http://www.progressiveliving.org/plutocracy_defined.htm">The term "plutocracy" is formally defined as government by the wealthy.
... the owners and top-level managers ... are far and away the dominant power figures ... Their corporations, banks, and agribusinesses come together as a corporate community that dominates the federal government in Washington. Their real estate, construction, and land development companies form growth coalitions that dominate most local governments.

A good blog, though not updated very frequently: http://www.ConcentrationOfWealth.blogspot.com/">Concentration of Wealth
A good rant, by the great comedian George Carlin: http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&videoid=935607276">Who Really Controls America

Oh, and one more quote:

http://etcweb.princeton.edu/cgi-bin/mfs.batke/14/moby_003.html?403#mfs">Chapter 3 - The Spouter-Inn - Moby Dick
"Wall," said the landlord, fetching a long breath, "that's a purty long sarmon for a chap that rips a little now and then. But be easy, be easy, this here harpooneer I have been tellin' you of has just arrived from the south seas, where he bought up a lot of 'balmed New Zealand heads (great curios, you know), and he's sold all on 'em but one, and that one he's trying to sell to-night, cause to-morrow's Sunday, and it would not do to be sellin' human heads about the streets when folks is goin' to churches. He wanted to, last Sunday, but I stopped him just as he was goin' out of the door with four heads strung on a string, for all the airth like a string of inions."

OK, so we all know that the Republicans are savages who sell human heads on Sundays, but what about the Democrats?

[Redstone]

1. Pretty much every politician is. Otherwise, they'd have actual JOBS.

Redstone

[bullimiami]

2. some dems are bought, some lack spines, some are good.

on the whole its better than what weve had. still a lot of room for improvement.

[Buzz Clik]

7. same with Republicans. But a Repub not on the take is still a Repub.

[snowbear]

3. Purity and Light and I don't care if I am the only one who voted that way....

If you want to bash Democrats, try Republicans Underground...

Sheesh..

[Quequeg]

4. no bashing of Democrats here

But I think an honest appraisal will help up to goad the party to be all that it once was and all that it could still be and perhaps even better.

I mean, people who wanted Ned Lemont to defeat Lieberman in the primary (and general election) were very pro-Democratic values, even if they were opposed to the Democratic incumbent Lieberman.

[PassingFair]

13. America -Right OR Wrong!

:sarcasm:

Corruption needs to be weeded out,
whether the it's kudzu or dandelions.

DLC = Democratic Lapdogs for Corporations

[Printer70]

19. Who's Bashing Democrats

My first allegiance is to values like justice and equality. Then the question is how to achieve those values. Of the two parties, the Democrats are far better. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't criticize them. Not if we're serious about upholding such values.

[jen4clark]

21. I didn't vote that way

But, we create reality by our thoughts. Thank you for the reminder.

I will now hold the Dems in my mind as the party of purity and light! Let's make it so!

[Kahuna]

5. I believe they are because I haven't heard any of them propose

the obvious with regards to the energy problem. To me the obvious is that if employers were encouraged to allow employees to telecommute one or two days a week that would go a long way to not only conserving energy but would also be beneficial to the ecology and global warming and also put the energy producers in the middle east on notice that they cannot continue to black mail us for access to their oil.

[Jackpine Radical]

6. How do farmers, dentists & auto mechanics telecommute?

[Quequeg]

8. tele-service technology

I read an article which said that in 2002, there was a trans-atlantic robotic surgery performed. There was a U.S. surgeon in New York that remotely controlled a robot in Spain where the patient was successfully operated on.

Hopefully, this technology will be slow in coming, because otherwise all the rest of our jobs will be going to India and China. :(

[Kahuna]

10. Dammit Jack! NOobody said that EVERYBODY should telecommute..

Sheesh! :eyes:

[Jackpine Radical]

12. Sorry...some opportunities are hard to resist, and

I stand with Oscar Wilde on at least one point--"I can resist anything but temptation."

[Cleita]

9. I think the atmosphere in Washington is far more dangerous

than we prolies know. I'm reserving judgement until the new Congress is sworn in. Then I think we will get a clearer picture on which officials have been corrupted and which ones are more or less still patriotic Americans.

[rapallos]

11. Could We Rename This Board

Can we rename this board, Destroy Democrats Underground.

Ever seen such lack of thought in one place?

And you worry about Democrats.

[groovedaddy]

14. Follow the money!

It's a simple as: who are they getting their money from - special interests (corporations) or direct donations from individuals. I don't the exact number but I know that there are more Democrats than Republicans who don't take corporate money.
ANY ONE who takes corporate money, is suspect in my book. GATT & NAFTA are proof enough - but there is way more evidence than these atrocious pieces of legislation. And, no, I'm not an "isolationist."

[Quequeg]

15. Are there any leaders in the Democratic party who do not take corporate money?

For example, are there any Democratic Presidential hopefuls who have not taken corporate money? Which Democratic leaders depend the least on corporate donations?

[Stardust]

27. They would have to be hugely wealthy to afford to run without corp. sponsors.

Kucinich, I think, belies that adage.

[groovedaddy]

32. Kucinich isn't wealthy

AND he doesn't take corporate money. He does get money from labor unions, which I have no problem with.

[Quequeg]

16. The Source of American Political Power and Why You Have None

Here's a good diary at "My Left Wing":

http://www.myleftwing.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=12961">The Source of American Political Power and Why You Have None - by author TocqueDeville

loy'al·ism n

1. Support or loyalty to the establishment, government, political party or leaders without condition or merit.

Perhaps by design, the dualism of our two party system perpetuates loyalism. The old saying, 'he may be a crook, but he's my crook' is the axiom of modern Democratic loyalism when victory over their "crook" is not just a preference, but a moral imperative.

But we must also acknowledge that loyalism, however rationalized, comes with a severe cost. For as long as your loyalty is given freely, without merit, without condition, and with only the promise that your guy is not their guy, you have sacrificed your political power.

If the People Power movement is ever going to break this cycle of lesser of two evils and instigate real reform in the Democratic party, we are going to have to learn how to use real power by ransoming our support. Only when the Democratic establishment fears us will they bid to our will.

For all practical purposes, there are only two forms of political power available to ordinary Americans: money and votes. And the ability to deliver either, in significant quantities, will certainly get you invited to the parade. But real power comes from not just being able to deliver money or votes, but from being able to take them away. Just ask any politician who has tried to take on big oil, or the finance and insurance industries. The real power of big money unveils itself not when it is in your favor, but when it has set you in its sights for destruction.

Currently, the Netroots has raised a lot of money for Democrats. By my estimate, around $5 million for the 2006 midterm. And yet our power remains marginal compared to K Street. Why? Because they do not fear us. Fear is the product of conditionality. And as long as our support, our loyalty is unconditional, we lose that card to play.

-----------
Congressional Scorecards on the Subject: Reduce Unnecessary FOREIGN WORKERS Visas (career) ...........
http://grades.betterimmigration.com/view_list.php3?&Category=5&Status=Career&Flag=4">U.S. House
http://grades.betterimmigration.com/view_list.php3?&Category=5&Status=Career&Flag=7">U.S. Senate

[gulliver]

17. What a great poll!

I think it's great how thoroughly you've mastered DU's HTML too, and after so few posts! The only thing that I don't like about it is the content. "Politicians are all the same" is a Republican theme.

Is it fair to say politics as a whole stinks when the vast majority of its skunks are Republican? I don't think so. Start with the proposition that politics stinks. Then reduce the number of Republicans participating (like we did this last election). If it stinks a lot less with fewer Republicans, then it seems to me the scientific among us should conclude that it isn't really politics that stinks.

If the smell goes when the Republicans do, then that tells us all we need to do next election in terms of odor management.

[Quequeg]

20. no , don't think that all politicians are the same

Also, in my post, I merely quoted those who express the view that money has too much influence in politics.

Then I included the poll, just to gauge what other DU'ers think. It appears that about 2/3rds of DU'ers believe that the party has been significantly compromised.

We've got to be willing to be critical of the party and individual members, if we're to make it better reflect the values/interests of the citizenry.

And then, we need to be willing to throw some of the bad ones out of office. E.G. many true-blue Democrats tried to throw out Lieberman.

I think it's great how thoroughly you've mastered DU's HTML too, and after so few posts! The only thing that I don't like about it is the content. "Politicians are all the same" is a Republican theme.

Is that true? Perhaps, after 6 years of disasterous Republican rule, some Republicans have backtracked into become cynical independents. If that's true, then that seems preferable to continuing to be GOP loyalists.

But I get the impression that the Republican theme has generally been: "I'm going to support my Republican rep no matter what he/she does."

http://www.myleftwing.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=12961">The Source of American Political Power and Why You Have None

loy'al·ism n

1. Support or loyalty to the establishment, government, political party or leaders without condition or merit.

What could compel self-ascribed conservatives to blindly follow a regime that has violated every principle on which conservatism stands? Loyalism. Indeed, conservatives in large number embraced the violation of the very foundation of conservative ideology itself - the limit of government power - in their willingness to follow president Bush and his unprecedented expansion of such power in the name of loyalty.
..............
Likewise, we Democrats should ask if it is good for ours. Our party is certainly not immune from the unmeritorious loyalty of our members. Perhaps by design, the dualism of our two party system perpetuates loyalism. The old saying, 'he may be a crook, but he's my crook' is the axiom of modern Democratic loyalism when victory over their "crook" is not just a preference, but a moral imperative.

But we must also acknowledge that loyalism, however rationalized, comes with a severe cost. For as long as your loyalty is given freely, without merit, without condition, and with only the promise that your guy is not their guy, you have sacrificed your political power.

You can be a big supporter of the Democratic party and still feel that it's terribly flawed and that some of its members are DLC'ers who appear to be trying to out-pro-business the pro-business Republicans. While we work to keep the corporatists Republicans out of power, we also need to work to reduce the corporatist influence in the Democratic party at the same time.

[IndianaGreen]

18. "The Democrats are the party of purity and light"

Actually they are not, but that's the way I voted in this poll. The reason is simple: the GOP is not a political party but a large criminal enterprise engaged in a conspiracy to destroy the republic and subvert the constitution. However flawed the Democrats may be, when compared to the GOP they are "the party of purity and light."

[Eric J in MN]

22. If so many people here consider the Democrats about as corrupt...

...why do you even bother spending so much time supporting the Democrats?

[Quequeg]

29. perhaps, they like the Democratic stand on social issues like

abortion and gay marriage.

Or perhaps, they're hopeful that if ordinary citizens increase their participation in the Democratic party, then eventually, the Democratic party will return to its storied past, which involved strongly supporting labor, consumers, and the environment even when this ran contrary to the moneyed interests.

[KoKo]

33. Because of the difference between "mostly corrupt" and "totally corrupt."

We think we can keep the Dems from the "totally corrupt" column by "pushing back" and hoping to even gain ground against "mostly corrupt" some day.

[OzarkDem]

23. Do you have any evidence, or just a lot of innuendo?

What a load of crap. If you have some sort of evidence or proof of Dems engaging in quid pro quo, by all means show it.

Otherwise, you're no better than the GOP yarn spinners.

[Imagevision]

24. The recent Foley investigation findings give a clue to Dems....Repukes

solidarity when confronted with scandals,

[kentuck]

25. I don't think it's that bad....

...yet.

[Eric J in MN]

26. Take action

...to prevent Democratic corruption.

Support an Ethics Reform bill without loopholes:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x2886094

[OzarkDem]

28. Like Pelosi has already done?

Can someone explain why Dems in this forum are criticizing Dem leaders for a problem that Dems have already begun to deal with?


http://www.cleanupwashington.org/documents/HR4682summary.pdf

http://www.democraticleader.house.gov/press/releases.cfm?pressReleaseID=1504

[Eric J in MN]

30. That summary of HR 4682 doesn't say that privately-funded travel....

...by Congress members would be banned.

Instead, it indicates that they can accept trips to golf in Scotland paid for by a charity, as long as the trip wasn't planned by a lobbyist.

So an oil company can setup the "Wonderful World of Petroleum Charity" which pays for Congressmen to golf in Scotland. Then a lobbyist can say, "I hope you liked your trip, and by the way, we hope you'll vote for the Tax Cuts for Oil Companies Bill." The lobbyist didn't organize the trip; the charity did.

Tell Congress you want a ban on privately-funded travel, not a symbolic law which does zilch.

[FreeStateDemocrat]

31. RFK, Jr. said: corporations control 75% Dems and 95% pukes which sounds about right.

I don't see much positive change happening in the new congress due to so many corporate whores in our own party. The spending bill that just passed is a good example along with the bankruptcy bill of the massive corporate influence to the harm of working class Americans, the primary constituency of the Democratic Party. In the not too distant future the corrupt Democrats will be voted out again to be replaced by the more corrupt pukes with the average American being continually fucked over by the ruling class. We're all delusional in thinking that this will ever change but we keep looking for a miracle and that is what the ruling class exploits with BS promises of helping people to have an opportunity to succeed and live with some dignity in our corporate exploited society.

[The Magistrate]

34. Locking

Flame-Bait.

Constructive criticism of Democrats or the Democratic Party is permitted. When doing so, please keep in mind that most of our members come to this website in order to get a break from the constant attacks in the media against our candidates and our values. Highly inflammatory or divisive attacks that echo the tone or substance of our political opponents are not welcome here.

You are not permitted to use this message board to work for the defeat of the Democratic Party nominee for any political office. If you wish to work for the defeat of any Democratic candidate in any General Election, then you are welcome to use someone else's bandwidth on some other website.

Democratic Underground may not be used for political, partisan, or advocacy activity by supporters of any political party or candidate other than the Democratic Party or Democratic candidates. Supporters of certain other political parties may use Democratic Underground for limited partisan activities in political races where there is no Democratic Party candidate.

Do not post broad-brush smears against Democrats or the Democratic Party.