Welcome to PatsFans.com

Are there any ethics left in politics?

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by weswelker#83, May 10, 2008.

  1. weswelker#83

    weswelker#83 Rookie

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2007
    Messages:
    4,535
    Likes Received:
    8
    Ratings:
    +8 / 0 / -0

  2. IcyPatriot

    IcyPatriot ---- JAG ----- PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    36,492
    Likes Received:
    18
    Ratings:
    +24 / 1 / -0

    #87 Jersey

    If we elected these people on ethics none of them would be there.

    To get there they must sell their soul to the devil.

    The trick is to get the ones that sell their soul but get a little work done also.
  3. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    17,253
    Likes Received:
    21
    Ratings:
    +23 / 0 / -0

    If you take any sample of ~500 people, you would end up with a similar mix in terms of ethics as you see in the Congress. Even among us in this forum, there are some who are truly ethical, some who are self-righteous but not especially ethical, some who lash themselves for not being ethical enough, some who are unethical, etc. There is no reason to think our representatives are emotionally any different that the rest of us. Those who think most politicians are corrupt are often projecting their own dishonest instincts onto politicians.
    Last edited: May 10, 2008
  4. Harry Boy

    Harry Boy Look Up, It's Amazing PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    37,502
    Likes Received:
    24
    Ratings:
    +29 / 0 / -5

    Ethical Politician:-----:singing:

    Watch Obama/Mccain/Hillary/Bush watch them when they're clapping grinning and bullsh!tting, do you people think any of these rat bastards care about you.

    John Gotti had more loyalty and ethics in him any of these scum.

    Politicians are the lowest form of life we have in this country, they Grin while they're destorying America, and screwing you to death.

    I am beginning to think that Left Wing Liberals are right, we need a dictator like Chavez or Castro or even the little Muslim Creep that runs Iran.

    :bricks:
    Last edited: May 10, 2008
  5. MrBigglesWorth

    MrBigglesWorth Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2006
    Messages:
    8,338
    Likes Received:
    16
    Ratings:
    +16 / 0 / -0

    we need to even the playing field and let the common man actually make a run for office. We need to set a budget, a defined limit on what you can spend on a campaign and give each legit candidate a certain dollar spending amount and they can not exceed it whatsoever or it disqualifies them.
  6. otis p. driftwood

    otis p. driftwood Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2008
    Messages:
    5,271
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0

    What about special interests?
  7. IcyPatriot

    IcyPatriot ---- JAG ----- PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    36,492
    Likes Received:
    18
    Ratings:
    +24 / 1 / -0

    #87 Jersey


    All well and good but they would have to pass this bill and I doubt they would.
  8. MrBigglesWorth

    MrBigglesWorth Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2006
    Messages:
    8,338
    Likes Received:
    16
    Ratings:
    +16 / 0 / -0

    special interests will always be there. but if we don't try to fix the system then we might as well give up hope.
  9. MrBigglesWorth

    MrBigglesWorth Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2006
    Messages:
    8,338
    Likes Received:
    16
    Ratings:
    +16 / 0 / -0

    i guess this is the struggle of democracy and myanmar is going through this too as well as many other nations
  10. PatsFan24

    PatsFan24 Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2005
    Messages:
    4,467
    Likes Received:
    3
    Ratings:
    +3 / 0 / -0

    the system is ruined, voting does not work.
  11. otis p. driftwood

    otis p. driftwood Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2008
    Messages:
    5,271
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0

    So...okay, I'm glad you addressed the question.

    Would you attempt to limit the ads run by special interests--you know the ads attacking the other guy, paid for by AARP, NRA or AFL-CIO?
  12. MrBigglesWorth

    MrBigglesWorth Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2006
    Messages:
    8,338
    Likes Received:
    16
    Ratings:
    +16 / 0 / -0

    I would say you would have to if you truly want to keep a level playing field or you could put a cap on the number of tv ads and the candidates can use them however they want to use them.
  13. otis p. driftwood

    otis p. driftwood Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2008
    Messages:
    5,271
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0

    Problem is that you're penalizing the candidate for the views and activities of others not necessarily related. You're also disenfranchising all the people who become members of special interest groups in some cases specifically for the political clout.

    That's why the supreme court has equated money with speech in campaigns. That's why I asked you the question.
  14. MrBigglesWorth

    MrBigglesWorth Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2006
    Messages:
    8,338
    Likes Received:
    16
    Ratings:
    +16 / 0 / -0

    then we're stuck with those with the money having the power. there is no such thing as a perfect gov't
  15. otis p. driftwood

    otis p. driftwood Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2008
    Messages:
    5,271
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0

    You give up awfully easily.

    And no, there's no such thing as a perfect government. As the saying goes, democracy is the worst form of government--except all the other forms.
  16. MrBigglesWorth

    MrBigglesWorth Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2006
    Messages:
    8,338
    Likes Received:
    16
    Ratings:
    +16 / 0 / -0

    power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absoultely. and throw in greed and it spells corruption.
  17. MrBigglesWorth

    MrBigglesWorth Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2006
    Messages:
    8,338
    Likes Received:
    16
    Ratings:
    +16 / 0 / -0

    give up when i've proved my point correctly?
  18. otis p. driftwood

    otis p. driftwood Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2008
    Messages:
    5,271
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0

    Don't even know what you mean, sorry.

    And what am I "giving up"? I wasn't arguing with you, I was trying to see if we could figure something out.
  19. MrBigglesWorth

    MrBigglesWorth Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2006
    Messages:
    8,338
    Likes Received:
    16
    Ratings:
    +16 / 0 / -0

    very non-partisan;)
  20. otis p. driftwood

    otis p. driftwood Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2008
    Messages:
    5,271
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0

    I don't like the present system. McCain-Feingold only made it worse, IMO, but I don't know how to solve the problem.

    Say I'm a member of the NRA. I can afford to send a candidate $25 or $50. Not much, considering. But when I send that money to the NRA, they put it with the $25 from 500 other people, and suddenly we've got an ad campaign that will have some effect.

    So if you bar special interests from getting involved, or put limits on it, you've taken my right to access the system, right?

    I don't know the way around it. Do you?
  21. MrBigglesWorth

    MrBigglesWorth Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2006
    Messages:
    8,338
    Likes Received:
    16
    Ratings:
    +16 / 0 / -0

    Isn't this what the Irish did and voted their own Irish into positions of power. unfortunately in a free enterprise system special interests will play a role. look at military contractors.

    I think at the very least you need to equalize the budget someone as to campagin. look at mccain who uses his wife's private jet. we need to prevnt buying an election.

    i'd rather vote on what someone has done rather than what they can buy or who they can buy.
  22. otis p. driftwood

    otis p. driftwood Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2008
    Messages:
    5,271
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0

    Would you rather have the candidate fly on his wife's jet or would you rather have the taxpayer's foot the bill for a recreation of Air Force One like Hillary has?

    I don't disagree with you. But how do you get past some of the basic first amendment issues?
  23. MrBigglesWorth

    MrBigglesWorth Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2006
    Messages:
    8,338
    Likes Received:
    16
    Ratings:
    +16 / 0 / -0

    well first of all they didn't have private jets in the early days of the country.

    that aside, i'd rather have the taxpayer foot the bill. i mean...how much is it really? we spend millions and billions on foolish things, on military weapons... i think something as important as the presidency should be run as legit as possible.so we spend a few million to ensure a fair election?

    we're giving this amount of money free to other countires anyways. with lousy leadership we spend 100x's that amount of money. with good leadership maybe this country will get back on track. but too many of these politicans have hidden agendas(ie. cheney and haliburton)
  24. otis p. driftwood

    otis p. driftwood Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2008
    Messages:
    5,271
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0

    Or Clinton and Haliburton.

    And what does "they didn't have private jets in the early days" got to do with anything? Sorry, that just doesn't make sense to me. I didn't know we were talking about the early days, I thought we were talking about now.
  25. MrBigglesWorth

    MrBigglesWorth Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2006
    Messages:
    8,338
    Likes Received:
    16
    Ratings:
    +16 / 0 / -0

    you talk about the first amendment. back when the founding fathers devised the constituion they probably never imagined how much the nation would grow and i'm sure they never intended the federal govt to gain so much power. the point about jets is that we have become greatly advanced and technology and growth has made the rich more powerful and furthered the divide from the common man. we must change with the times and the same goes with elections.
  26. otis p. driftwood

    otis p. driftwood Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2008
    Messages:
    5,271
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0

    See...now you're talking about messing with the first amendment...that doesn't bother you at all?
  27. MrBigglesWorth

    MrBigglesWorth Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2006
    Messages:
    8,338
    Likes Received:
    16
    Ratings:
    +16 / 0 / -0

    1. McConnell v. Federal Election Commission

    2. they added the amendment to abolish slavery. haven't the majority of us just become slaves to the the union, to the rich?

    3. Bush saw no problem in establishing the Patriot Act thereby infinging upon and taking some of our rights.
  28. otis p. driftwood

    otis p. driftwood Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2008
    Messages:
    5,271
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0

    3. Yes he did. And I don't like it one damn bit. It's one of many things I'm angry with the man about.

    2. I don't know about slaves. But what's your point anyway? They added and repealed prohibition too. Should we say they're drunk on power? I mean what?

    1. Yes, I know. Remember a few posts back when I said McCain-Feingold had created more problems than it solved, the way it stripped power from the people and gave it to the media and all those cute little 527's?

    The Supreme Court punted. Bush signed it, figuring the Court would strike it down and he wouldn't look like the bad guy for vetoing it, and the court said "not us, pal, not us".

    I bet the Roberts court wouldn't rubber stamp it.

Share This Page