Majority Rule Shifts Corruption Lens On Democrats
Tags: Caucus of Corruption, Democrat Culture of Corruption, House Democrats, Kim Strassel, MSM, Nancy Pelosi, Rod Blagojevich.
Click here to get Caucus of Corruption: The Truth About The New Democratic Majority by Matt Margolis and Mark Noonan.
The Wall Street Journal’s Kim Strassel notes something Mark and I know all too well, that the Blagojevich scandal is just the typical iceberg of Democrat corruption…
A note to all those visitors who will soon flood Washington for the inauguration: Be careful of the “swamp.”
That would be the swamp Speaker Nancy Pelosi vowed to drain when she led her party to victory in 2006. The GOP had been rocked by scandal, and Mrs. Pelosi and Democrats won, in part, by promising to clean up the “culture of corruption” that pervaded Washington.
Instead, Democrats now have an image problem. The real issue isn’t so much Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich’s Senate-seat auction, as it is the focus that his scandal has directed toward a wider assortment of Democratic troubles. This isn’t great timing for Barack Obama, who campaigned on cleaner government.
The Blagojevich drama is titillating enough, and local Democrats’ dithering over how to fill Mr. Obama’s seat guarantees it will remain a storyline longer than is comfortable. But the Illinois drama has also thrust new light on the ongoing ethical controversies of House Ways and Means Chairman Charlie Rangel. At the rate the House Ethics Committee is receiving complaints — over Mr. Rangel’s real-estate problems, tax problems, his privately sponsored trips to the Caribbean, and donations to his center in New York — this too will make headlines for a while.
This is actually something Mark and I mentioned in our book, Caucus of Corruption. Since Republicans were in the majority in 2006, it was easier for the Democrats to charge corruption against the majority — while their own rampant corruption went unreported on. Perhaps now that the Democrats will be in total power for the next two years the media will shift focus back on the corruption that has been rampant in the Democratic Party for years.
To do our part to help, of course there is our book, which still has lots of relevant information, and there is Democrat Corruption, our new, rebranded and relaunched version of No Agenda, which chronicled Democrat corruption between 2005 and 2007. This new site includes all our earlier content, as well as new material recently added, that will continue to grow.
Thank you for visiting Blogs For Victory. If you enjoy our content, please consider making a donation to help us cover the costs of our servers.Matt Margolis is co-author (with Mark Noonan) of Caucus of Corruption: The Truth About The New Democratic Majority. He also blogs at The Buffalo Bean. Follow Matt on Twitter.
17 Responses to “Majority Rule Shifts Corruption Lens On Democrats”
Caucus of Corruption
This is too rich. Your Democrat Corruption site appears to be corrupted:
http://s414.photobucket.com/albums/pp223/winnowhead/?action=view¤t=Picture1.png… at least according to good old Safari.
What would you wager that on any given day the instances of GOP corruption is equal to the amount of Democratic Party corruption as reported by the MSM? On the face of that what would finding this mean?
BTW… Democrat Corruption…. learn to spell, for crying out loud. You think you’re mocking Democrats, but you just sound like you don’t speak English. It’s “Democratic.”
Pain,
We’ll go you one better – suppose in any given year the number of GOPers caught corrupt was twice the number of Democrats caught ditto: what Matt and I would fearlessly contend is that the Democrats would get off the hook from their own side at a far higher ratio than the GOPers would.
Matt, you MOE-ron—don’t you read your own blog? If you would just pay attention, you would realize that from the Dem side, it is not what you DO that matters, but what you THINK.
Therefore, Gerry Studds was a hero because he was “HONEST” (ie: not ‘hypocritical’) about liking to diddle little boys, while Mark Foley was vile and beneath contempt though he never did anything but respond to off-color e-mails sent by an adult, because he did not come out and talk about liking to do so.
It’s a Brave New World, Matt, where the Thought Police rule, where corruption is not a matter of what is done but of what someone THINKS about it. It’s a world where applauding, feting, and rewarding wrongdoers is just fine, if they have a D after their names, but where the merest accusation of something is enough for total damnation if the accused is an R. To hell with due process, the man was INDICTED !!!!!!
All politicians are equal, but some are more equal than others.
And, whineyhead, this hypersensitivity about Democrat vs Democratic is getting sillier and sillier. If I am a Republican, are you a Democratic? And, as the word ‘democratic’ is a modifier with meanings totally separate from the party, it can merely be clearer to make it clear that one use refers to the party and another to the philosophy, form of government, etc. Let’s face it, the word ‘democratic’ refers less and less to the party of Democrats.
now if u could just figure out why so many crooks act like politicians, you might just figure out how to separate the two…
You don’t see liberals running around calling Republicans “Republics” (or some other slaughtering of proper English), and then snickering like little kids. Sorry, it’s just childish.
You don’t see liberals running around calling Republicans “Republics”
No reason why they should, Winnow — Republicans belong to the “Republican” Party, not the “Republic” Party, just like Democrats belong to the Democrat Party. Of course we could start calling you Democratics if you’d prefer. Personally, I think Keefer’s term, “DonkaRoaches”, is much more descriptive. Long before the end of The One’s first (and likely only) term, a whole lot of folks are going to be calling you names a lot worse than that.
democraps. It’s my side, but I want to have some fun with these names.
Here’s an idea. Rather than sit around talking about how corrupt the other guys are, how about we go after the scum in both parties. Appoint Patrick J. Fitzgerald to a position with the tools to go after anyone in Washington whose on the take. Anyone. He’s already shown he will go after people from either party. How about it? Let’s drain the sewer and get rid of the rats.
Sounds good to me, casper, except that I think Fitz would need a lot of backup.
orlando,
I agree. I would also ask Obama to pledge that he wouldn’t anyone convicted a “get of jail free” card like Bush did with Liddy. Let the convicted serve their terms.
pledge?
like he did to america when he said he would accept public campaign financing….then switched up at the last minute so he could accept hundreds of millions from (unknown) foreigners….
i really dont think obama’s “pledge” is worth squat to be honest…
I would also ask Obama to pledge that he wouldn’t anyone convicted a “get of jail free” card
Ditto. Really, I’d like to see that become law: No pardons for your convicted buddies. But that’s a pipe dream.
js, Some of us here have ideas.
Interesting that no one on the right seems interested in going after crooked politicians on both sides.
OK, so run against us on corruption campaigns. Whatever. I do not condone Spitzer or Blago, or Jefferson. So you have no argument there. I further do not condone George W. Bush’s repeated violations of the Constitution, Dick Cheney, Tom DeLay, etc. (you know the list. It’s called “Liberal Talking Points”). THAT’s where we disagree.
You are partisan to the point where you are blind to your own party’s faults, and have sunk into hypocrisy, even as you accuse the other side of doing so. Whatever. I am not a hypocrite: as I’ve already said, I condemn Spitzer etc. (see “Republican Talking Points”) just as much as Bush etc. (“Liberal Talking Points”).