* "Standing in front of national television cameras, DeLay said it was "incredibly outrageous" that the FBI recently raided the Capitol Hill office of Louisiana Democrat William Jefferson, who is under investigation on bribery allegations... "I believe in the Constitution, and people need to understand that no one is above the law," said DeLay" (link)
* "With the Democrats declaring this year's mid-term elections a referendum on Republican corruption, you would have expected a full-scale Republican counterattack against Louisiana Democrat William Jefferson after the FBI raided his offices Saturday night. But instead, the latest developments in the unfolding Jefferson saga have brought the two parties together for once, with both Republican and Democratic leaders in Congress agreeing on one thing: FBI raids on their offices are bad and dangerous things." (link)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
Just shows that both parties are in it together, ergo, one party system, which is bad, mkay?
microeconomic theory shows that if there are only two parties, they'll inevitably be very similar...
Originally, there were no political parties and one gained access to the ballot by petition signatures. In those days, the electoral college had a purpose. After the first ballot, when candidates from all over the country failed to achieve a majority, Presidential electors were free to change their vote and through a series of balloting, eventually the EC worked out a majority candidate, weighing the various needs of different parts of the country, cities, farms, etc. Now, the two party system has been written into the election law codes and has usurped the true purpose of the Electoral College. At least originbally, the will of the people was heard first before the sifting process began. With the two party system, they do the sifting first and then we get to pick one from column A and one from column B. It was not until the early 70's that we got primaries in presidential elections. Before that, there were only 6. The rest was smoke filled rooms. The changes in the election laws allowing these primaries was a direct result of the Gene McCarthy delegates at the '68 Convention in Chicago. Remind me to tell you that story some day. I was there and part of that battle.
man - i wasnt even born then!
american 'democracy' is a laughing stock. i dont think there's a western democracy that is nearly as absurd. step one: publicly finance elections. step 2: introduce some sort of Run Off voting.
Well, since I've been at this electoral stuff since before you were born, Lukery, I'll say that I'll be damned if I'm going to pay for mudslinging. Sooo first step for me is BANNING all paid political announcments and replacing them with a series of comprehensive and serious debates on all of the issues, with every candidate that is on the ballot. Then, I would use public funds to pay travel expenses for candidates to go to events that are open to public, at no cost, and none of this matching fund crap so the fattest cats get the biggest cuts.
i'm not really sure how it works in the UK and here - but i think the media companies give (or the govt pays for) equal time - and there's an 'official' start to the campaign (i think the UK campaign runs for 6 weeks)
regardless of the details - other countries seem to manage somehow - and spend about 1% of the cost that US elections cost.
"I'll be damned if I'm going to pay for mudslinging"
you already pay, hunny, you already pay...
That's why I want to stop paid political announcements, which are mostly lies and mud. Certainly, there are better ways to do it.
Post a Comment