It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Ten Most Corrupt Politicians Include Clinton, Obama, Huckabee

page: 2
14
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 14 2008 @ 03:03 PM
link   
Yes, I was laying the sarcasm on pretty thick in my previous post




posted on Jan, 14 2008 @ 03:12 PM
link   

About Us

Judicial Watch, Inc., a conservative, non-partisan educational foundation, promotes transparency, accountability and integrity in government, politics and the law.

Through its educational endeavors, Judicial Watch advocates high standards of ethics and morality in our nation’s public life and seeks to ensure that political and judicial officials do not abuse the powers entrusted to them by the American people.

Judicial Watch fulfills its educational mission through litigation, investigations and public outreach.

Judicial Watch


I guess it is possible to be conservative (or liberal) and non-partisan, but it would be quite the hat-trick.

And Larry Craig? Come on!



posted on Jan, 14 2008 @ 03:32 PM
link   
Forrest lady, I dont think Craigs being gay is the issue, the issue is he was attempting to break the law by soliciting sex in a bathroom at an airport. I dont really care for the law of prostitution being illegal, if people want to pay for it, let them. But to do it in a restroom where little kids are, is just taking it a little too far. I dont care about him being gay, whatever it doesnt matter, and has no bearing on who he really is. That is like the other guy in washington, cant remember his name and dont care really, but the guy that was sending that kid nasty emails. Be gay, I dont care, but keep it to yourself and leave kids alone.

The thing is, these public officials are supposed to be honorable people, they are suppose to serve their countries for just that doing a service. Instead it is done to line their pockets, and to gain more power over the little people. It is disguisting, and it happens at every level from small town government all the way up to federal government. There is no integrity, and there is no accountability for their actions. There shouldnt have to be the worry of accountability if there was integrity in the fools on the hill. However they get away with all this crap because they have done an absolutely wonderful job at dumbing down the general masses. While the latest on britney, paris and all the rest of hollywood idiots is being unleashed on us as something that really f ing matters. These criminals are running this great country into the ground! If you bring this crap to light you are branded by most everyday people as a conspiracy theorist nut job. All they would have to do is open their eyes and step away from the damn TV, realize that faux news, cnn and all other msm outlet gives about as much of a crap about them, as the idiots that run this country.

We have a real honest to god chance at change, like Ron Paul or not he is not the status quo, what he preaches is what are founding fathers wanted this country to be. He is not a racist and I swear if one more person says that to me, I am going to puch them in the face. This latest pathetic smear attempt is just so frigging ridiculous it makes me want to laugh and vomit all at the same time. What is even more pathetic is there are a few that supported him that arent now because of this. DO SOME DAMN RESEARCH INTO IT, dont be led by a crazed sheperd to you damn slaughter! If he was it would have come out in word not some damn written form by someone else, sorry but if you have those beliefs if you hate because of the color of someones skin. Pretty soon being in politics for so long, you are going to have a slip of the tongue, you are going to show some how in more concrete proof that you are driven by hate. He/we paul and his supporters scare the hell out of the people behind the scenes, he represents change and they dont want that, and by god that makes me know with absolute certainty he is the man for the job.



[edit on 14-1-2008 by gunner36]



posted on Jan, 14 2008 @ 03:44 PM
link   
Hi Gunner: Good post, I agree with you 100%. I always forget that part about soliciting; still it makes no difference to me, I don't think prostitution should be illegal. But yeah in a public place?

The thing is, this could easily have compromised him, as someone could come along and blackmail him; but of course it's out now, so he can't be. But here's a point. The stated reason by politicians, for not allowing gays into the military or CIA is tht they could be blackmailed too easily.

And if that's the reason according to them, shouldn't that apply to politicians as well?
I always thought that was a stupid reason, but hey that's how they think. But they have set themselves up for hypocrisy and double standards.



posted on Jan, 14 2008 @ 03:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by TrueAmerican
Lol, well if you're going to vote the lesser of evils, why not just vote Ron Paul and get no evil?

Well, there is some evil with him. I like Paul on all of his positions except foreign policy. His foreign policy IMO is sort of naive. If it was not for this, I would definitely vote for him. I believe his foreign policy is also the reason why he cannot be elected.



posted on Jan, 14 2008 @ 04:01 PM
link   
So where is the republican version of this list?


Thats a pretty heavy slant on the democratic side there and I KNOW that they aren't the only ones muddying the political waters. Any wonder its a conservative run site? You can find just about the same and worse from almost anyone in public office. If you think otherwise you are incredibly naive.

Oh and FYI: Ron Paul is no saint save in the eyes of his fans. I haven't even decided who I would vote for but even I would not claim any of the candidates are heaven sent.

- Lee



posted on Jan, 14 2008 @ 04:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by gunner36
I would vote for any of those other people over Ron Paul, he is a racist. It has been proven the past couple of days that he had his name on something that someone else wrote that was borderline racist. BAH.


Blah, blah, blah... Is that why the President of the NAACP came out and stated that he didn't think Ron Paul was a racist? I mean, I'm just curious as I would assume that he would know.



posted on Jan, 14 2008 @ 04:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by centurion1211
It's good that you point this statement out. I would hope that anyone and everyone would dig at least a little deeper than this into an issue before making up their minds.


Oh I have.

I've come to the conclusion that either he lives an insular life and not one person he knows ever read his newsletter and if they did they neglected to inform him of what they contained....or as some people that claimed to have worked for him have stated he wrote some of them and the rest were the work of Lew Rockwell. I know he never corrected, retracted or fired those responsible. That says something to me.

Either he is incredibly naive/irresponsible/negligent (come on it was under his own name) or he is a bigot that contributed to the stories because he, not unlike the like the folks that ran his newsletters, wanted to appeal to a target audience that shared those sentiments. Why else publish such venomous filth?

It's possible that he forgot he was running for public office and that anything said under his banner was A-Ok with him long as he didn't read it but that would be just...stupid. Right? Bigot or bumbling?

Neither of those are redeeming qualities.

Don't shoot me Paulites, I'm just saying I didn't just make up my mind based on one news segment.


I'm not enamored by any of the candidates as of yet but I just don't see that Ron Paul halo you guys do either.

- Lee

Lee



posted on Jan, 14 2008 @ 04:20 PM
link   


I believe his foreign policy is also the reason why he cannot be elected.


I think his foriegn policy ideas are precisely why he has been receiving so much grassroots support.

Like it or not, the Iraq War is making Americans turn a critical eye towards our interventionist and aggressive foreign policy.

Americans are sick of failed resource wars with incompetent despots on the other side of the planet. They're sick of their sons dying for nothing, they're sick of their tax money going to fund a military grossly bloated beyond any reasonable need for self-defense, and they're sick of us going out and creating new enemies in places they've never even heard of.

The American Empire is approaching it's end, one way or another.

Not only is the world sick of it, but most Americans are too.

Not all of us actually need the Viagrifying effect of being the world's #1 bully, you know. Not all of us are quite so insecure that we need to fortify our self esteem by bombing lots of swarthy foreigners


[edit on 1/14/08 by xmotex]



posted on Jan, 14 2008 @ 04:20 PM
link   
reply to post by thisguyrighthere
 


You are right, gunner36's post is completely sarcastic in nature. He doesn't see anything wrong with Ron Paul. But.. You know, The constitution was written a long time ago, and things have changed. This country is not capable of upholding the original ideals George Washington and them meant for it to.

Ron Paul represents freedom for all people, and less freedom for corporations and corruption. I think I am going Hilary too. She knows how to lead us into war and take away personal freedoms just fine. Please, don't doubt her ability.



posted on Jan, 14 2008 @ 04:56 PM
link   
One of the things that bothers me the most about RP is the fact that he did not return the $500 to Don Black. It makes me wonder if he has any limit as to who he will accept money from. It's a mater of association with dirty money, imo.



posted on Jan, 14 2008 @ 06:14 PM
link   
I would say Clinton and Giuliani happen to be some of the most corrupt Presidential candidates, but I cannot comment on Obama.

Two of the least corrupt politicians (and Presidential candidates) would have to be Dennis Kucinich and Ron Paul. Mike Gravel is definitely a very truth-devoted person, but he gets essentially no attention at all from the media.

Clinton's environmental policy involves installing CFL bulbs in her house!



posted on Jan, 14 2008 @ 06:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky
One of the things that bothers me the most about RP is the fact that he did not return the $500 to Don Black. It makes me wonder if he has any limit as to who he will accept money from. It's a mater of association with dirty money, imo.


Hmm, RP addressed this issue in a video interview. Due to the nature and limits of his campaign contributions, there are so many that he said he will not be put in the position of micromanaging and tracking down every little donation that people don't agree with. And I fully support him in that decision. His team's efforts are way better spent looking and planning ahead, not wrapped up in controversy tracking down every little campaign donation that his opposition doesn't like.

What's more, I find it very interesting that someone with your astute intelligence would let something that trivial trump the good that RP represents, jsobecky. It'd almost be like me saying I don't like you anymore just because we disagreed on one little post, on one little forum somewhere. Please reassess.



posted on Jan, 14 2008 @ 07:25 PM
link   
This list doesn't really surprise me too much but it was nice to hear some dirt on Obama, ever since he was first considered as a candidate I knew he was hiding a thing or two because he just seemed far too clean, almost a manchurian candidate feeling about him.

However, I find nothing more shocking than the idea that Hillary would even be considered as a candidate given her god awful record. I was shocked as hell when she became the senator for my home state but considering who her main constituency is here I shouldn't be too surprised.

I dunno, maybe it's me but I would have thought that the Dems would have wanted to stay as far away from Hillary as possible after all the crap that went on during Bill's presidency. I mean she is one of the most obviously corrupt and I don't think the knowledge of her corruption is really much of a secret.

I think everyone's gone insane, here we have an "election" where we have nothing but criminals in the front running and everyone still thinks it's going to be a legitimate fraud free election.



posted on Jan, 14 2008 @ 08:41 PM
link   
Oh! Ron Paul, our savior.

Shuffle your hooves little sheep down to the voting stand. Sign your name on the dotted line, Thank you Mr. Bah Bah. Punch that chad, fill in the bubble, swipe that card. We know who you voted for.

Whats that noise outside? Its the big bad wolf. "I am going to huff and puff and blow your house down!" cries the wolf. Whats that crash? As the jackboots smash your front door. Your muscles cramp as they hit you with the prod. Herded to the bus. Carted off to the farm.

Where is your savior now?

Time for all the sheep to learn new tricks. The crooked grin spreads across his face, your new class begins. The screams all day long... BAH BAH!.

Then he appears, like the sun. Your savior. It is him, come to save me. He pats you on the head as he passes you by. Between your castration and electro-shock, your savior whispers in your ear "be a good little sheep and lick my shoe and maybe we will send you home." A tear runs down your cheek, as you realize, it was him, the wolf all along. Ron Paul.



Your vote does not count. Wake up people. Ron Paul is a sham to expose you as a deviant.

When the NWO takes control they will re-educate you. And how nice you were to turn your name in and be added to that list.

Hillary 2008



posted on Jan, 14 2008 @ 10:36 PM
link   
reply to post by Dr_Suess
 


LOL!!!! You ought to be in politics yourself!




posted on Jan, 14 2008 @ 10:42 PM
link   
about the list it is heavily slighted toward Democrats

with that being said, i think the poster who asked for a least corrupt list was hitting the nail on the head.

And yes i think ronny boy would be on that list. And yes i think his biggest flaw is that he is out of touch w/ reality. He is a constitutionalist but there has been elite international bankers and corporate big wigs pulling the strings for decades , thanks to the life long political handlers like Zigbinew Brezenski, William Kristol, George shultz, Henry Kissinger, James Woosley, Madeline Albrigh, Sandy Berger, Pete Hoekstra , need i continue.

but then again so many sheeple are out ot touch of this reality that really believe the changes he wants to make have a chance in hell of happening (before he goes the way of lincoln, kennedy) oh boy the civil unrest that would cause.

the presidents are puppets. if they don't act like good puppets they die. but most realize what they are getting into, and for their co-operation they get their names grazing the history books and credit for much more than they ever really were responsible for. unfortunatly there is not a term limit on the president's handlers and advisors.


[edit on 14-1-2008 by cpdaman]



posted on Jan, 14 2008 @ 10:46 PM
link   
reply to post by TrueAmerican
 



Originally posted by TrueAmerican
Hmm, RP addressed this issue in a video interview. Due to the nature and limits of his campaign contributions, there are so many that he said he will not be put in the position of micromanaging and tracking down every little donation that people don't agree with. And I fully support him in that decision. His team's efforts are way better spent looking and planning ahead, not wrapped up in controversy tracking down every little campaign donation that his opposition doesn't like.

What's more, I find it very interesting that someone with your astute intelligence would let something that trivial trump the good that RP represents, jsobecky. It'd almost be like me saying I don't like you anymore just because we disagreed on one little post, on one little forum somewhere. Please reassess.

A good rule of thumb for politicians is to avoid the perception of wrongdoing, and money from a white supremacist stinks like dead fish. But RP seems to be saying "I am so above reproach that this dirty money becomes cleansed merely by touching my hands. Nothing to worry about, nothing to see here."

And he does not have to micromanage every donation. That's what staffers are for. It's one thing if a bad donation slips by the staff, it's quite another to be made aware of a bad donation and do nothing to fix it.

But it's not that one thing all by itself. It's that plus the newsletter plus who knows what else. It just gives me a sense of unease, that's all.



posted on Jan, 14 2008 @ 11:05 PM
link   


But RP seems to be saying "I am so above reproach that this dirty money becomes cleansed merely by touching my hands. Nothing to worry about, nothing to see here."


That's disingenous.

What RP is saying on the issue is that he's not going to waste his time with a phony media-manufactured controversy about a petty $500 donation and start doing background checks on every single citizen that sends him a few bucks


I'm sure, if you were a paid political operator, you could go track down some objectionable donor for any given campaign, perhaps a child molester or drug dealer, who knows? I'm fairly certain someone got some mileage out of this particular phony controversy.

It appears to me, by his utter dismissal of this farce, that he is above the kind of shady, media driven, soundbite politics we have been sinking into under our recent epidemic of Bush's and Clintons. The kind of politics where symbolism, blatant sensationalist emotional manipulation, spurious accusations, and innuendo outweigh any real debate on the truly important issues at stake.

And more power to him.



posted on Jan, 14 2008 @ 11:09 PM
link   
I call partisan bias

Are the people on that list, regardless of party, crooked as hell? Yes. Is that list really designed to do the job of a watch-dog group? No. It's designed to hurt Democrats.

I can't help noticing the extreme differences between the members of the two parties who were selected for this risk.

4 Republicans, 6 Democrats... balanced enough right?

Until you consider who they are.

Scooter Libby- already gone. Why is a "watchdog" group barking at the burglar who has already fled, not biting the ones who are still in the house?

Larry Craig- as good as gone. Same question as above essentially.

Rudy Giuliani- A mayor with dillusions of grandeur and a snowball's chance in hell there's a reason he all but skipped the early primaries, and there's a reason that doing so has NEVER paid off before.
In this case the dog is barking at the one who is kind of thinking about coming into the house while he ignores the one already inside.

And Mike Huckabee- the only serious Republican on the list, is still only 3rd in the pack. Ditto.


Compare that to 5 of the 6 Democrats:
The Speaker of the House,

The Senate Majority Leader

The top two Democratic Presidential contenders

The second most senior Democrat in the House

And what about election bids:
4 out of 6 democrats are facing elections they can realistically win in 2008, assuming that they aren't ruined by scandal.

0 of the 4 Republicans are facing elections that they have a good chance of winning in 2008.


Where is the House Minority Leader, John Boehner? Judicial Watch was willing to name Pelosi just on the suspicion that she may have influenced the awarding of contracts (which I don't doubt, but the standard of proof is the point), yet they don't harbor any similar suspicion that Boehner might have known more than he says about Mark Foley, or that getting money from mutual friends between him and Jack Abramoff might have been shady? Not to mention audio tapes PROVING that he conspired with Newt Gingrich to do exactly what Gingrich had publically promised not to do (oppose the ethics probe agianst him). Nor shall we mention that Boehner responded to that the same way that they found inappropriate in Huckabee's case- filing a lawsuit.
So Huckabee can't interefere with the ethics process or sue people over it, but Boehner can? Why, because Boehner has power while Huckabee has only a small chance of gaining some (and can readily be replaced by other candidates?)

Or Mitch McConnell- fundraiser extordinaire who bought the Senate Minority Leadership with over 220 million in fundraising over the course of his senate career, most of it directed to fellow Republicans. He's also a major opponent of campaign finance reform, and newspaper investigations have discovered strong correlations between his fundraising from casinos, tobacco, coal mines, and credit card companies and his actions in office.


Sure, the list takes a swing at both sides of the aisle. It aims for the shoulder on the Republicans and the nose on the Democrats though. I declare shenanigans.



new topics

top topics



 
14
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join