Quite a story, how the party of business can't keep track of its own finances. Reminds of the $2 million theft by insiders of the Greater Miami Chamber of Commerce in 2004. The public is inclined to believe that organizations representing business interests like the GOP know how to manage money. I mean, they didn't make their money gaming the system, did they? How does the Rolex crowd, including luminaries like Al Hoffman-- former WCI Communities chief and chief Bush fund raiser-- feel about shaking down political contributions only to find them landing in the chairman's account? It is hard to imagine those "tax and spend" Democrats doing worse than those "steal and spend" Republicans.See: (Jim Greer arrested, accused of diverting $125,000 in party money.)
9 comments:
It's becoming pretty clear that Republicans have no place in a democratic society.
There are bad bananas in both republican and democrat bunches. This one is going to pay the price, as well he should.
While I see many of the faux pas' committed by republicans used on this blog as an entirely "reasonable" indictment of the entire party; where's the wailing and gnashing of teeth in the face of our "can do no wrong" president's vacuum of leadership?
He insisted on passing a bad health care bill despite the majority of american's opposition, he is clearly not a supporter of Israel (again against the majority of americans), has acted as if he were paralyzed in response to the worst environmental disaster in the nation's history, and most recently, presided over an administration that apparently broke the law to save senator Arlen Specter from being relegated to the political scrap heap.
Obama is becoming more and more exposed as an arriviste who lacks the political maturity, experience, maneuverability, and gravitas to execute his duties as president of these united states successfully.
While George W. Bush (who I admit was far from perfect; aren't we all?) is much criticized and maligned by those on the left, there is no doubt in my mind that the hindsight of history will portray him and his administration as being much more competent than progressives and liberals give them credit for being.
Maybe Eric Holder will decide to try BP executives in New York like Khalid Sheikh Mohammed? Better yet, maybe he'll decide they can get a fair trial in New Orleans!
This is Crist's fault. His lack of executive leadership = Jim Greer. This will hurt him in the polls vs. Marco, Maurice and Kendrick.
"His steep descent from party chairman to pariah could drag down Gov. Charlie Crist's bid for U.S. Senate. The two are longtime allies, and Crist backed Greer until the day he stepped down."
http://www.baynews9.com/content/36/2010/6/2/625194.html?title=Former+Florida+GOP+chairman+Jim+Greer+arrested
David, your comment about the president being an arriviste makes me ask, why then do members of the so-called Tea Party and Republican Party keep harping on about getting rid of incumbents? Which is it, experienced politicians or neophytes?
Donna;
Would that I had the power to make you do anything. You CHOSE to respond to my comment, and I choose to answer your entreaty thusly...
The term arriviste (or parvenu if you please) not only denotes recent acquisition of position, wealth, title, etc,; but a concomitant lack of esteem, respect, or acceptance. These things must be earned, usually by embodying the traits that are necessary to the apposite conduct of the position, wealth, title, etc. recently attained. The word is not neutral (like neophyte), and is most certainly not a compliment.
As I stated in my earlier post, Mr. Obama (in my very humble opinion) is a man who lacks the political maturity, experience, maneuverability, and gravitas to execute the duties of his office successfully.
As such, he is ineligible (again in my humble opinion) for the esteem, respect, and acceptance that would be due a competent president. I do have ultimate respect for him as a man and a human being. Just his willingness to take on the job of president is evidence enough of his due in this regard.
I don't doubt Mr. Obama's heart is in the right place. Although I am a card carrying republican, once the election was concluded, Mr. Obama became OUR (and my) president, and I wish him well. If he is a success, so go us all.
Unfortunately, it appears he is the wrong man, in the wrong job, at the wrong time. He may have bumbled along without significant import on our lives in a time of relative peace, prosperity, and laissez faire. Alas, this is currently far from the national and international realities of life in our world. Also particularly disturbing and alarming is Mr. Obama appears (as fair as I can be) to be not opposed to the gradual ceding of our national sovereignty to "progressive" organizations like the United Nations and the worlwide cabal of central and international bankers embodied by national central banks, the IMF, the World Bank, and the Bank for International Settlements in Switzerland.
As to the meat of your question, I am not opposed to "neophyte" politicians (your terminology). Nor am I opposed to career politicians. What I am opposed to are voters who do not properly vet the politicians they vote for. What results from this lack of due diligence are men and women like Mr. Obama. They are either: 1)Well intentioned, willing to serve, possibly attracted to the prestige and power; and hopelessly out of their league (this is our current president), or 2) In it for their own personal enrichment, the exercise of power for it's own sake, or to push an agenda that is contrary to the Declaration of Independence and our venerable Constitution.
With both documents already in tatters, and the progressive intrusion of the federal government by legal subterfuge into areas expressly forbidden by our Constitution (such as the delegation by Congress of its Constitutionally mandated power to "coin money and regulate the value thereof" to a private, for profit corporation(s) styled as the "Federal Reserve"), it is vital that we elect leaders who are at the very least are willing to limit further sprawl of the all-encompassing grotesque monstrosity our federal government has become and able to exercise competent, capable leadership on the myriad of complex, highly impactful issues that they deal with daily. In the case of the president, it is of particular import, as issues don't reach his desk for the most part unless they could not be resolved somewhere else along the way.
Unfortunately, I have little confidence based on the track record thus far, that the president and his administration have the wherewithal to be successful in their endeavors.
I hope I have elucidated and explicated in sufficient detail...david
David you earned my putz this week.
I don't see a way out of it, people. If we clean house and put in newbies, the shadow government gets stronger. If we leave the incumbents in, the shadow government gets more connected. It has more to do with character, statesmanship and morality than anything. We have lost our way. There are a lot of people in this country who possess very little of those things. It is an illness, but they are the ones on stage. I cringe at the idea of a revolving door in government, run by lobbyists. Furthermore, we would go broke paying their lifetime insurance premiums!
Dear Genius;
For? Having a position that makes sense, is based on facts, and doesn't rely on emotional histrionics, hand wringing, and lamenting ululation to draw attention?
Read this:
http://www.tampabay.com/news/politics/stateroundup/its-not-party-but-power-that-corrupts-in-tallahassee/1100338
Post a Comment