not even a pretense at hiding cronyism anymore

http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/apr/21/senate-husbands-firm-cashes-in-on-crisis/

On the day the new Congress convened this year, Sen. Dianne Feinstein introduced legislation to route $25 billion in taxpayer money to a government agency that had just awarded her husband's real estate firm a lucrative contract to sell foreclosed properties at compensation rates higher than the industry norms.

Mrs. Feinstein's intervention on behalf of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. was unusual: the California Democrat isn't a member of the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs with jurisdiction over FDIC; and the agency is supposed to operate from money it raises from bank-paid insurance payments - not direct federal dollars.
 
True, but big money has ran our govt for years.
this is not just a democratic party thing.


Remember enron? Billions for tax breaks for big oil when gas was $4/GAL, ETC...

I said the Bush bank giveaway was wrong.
Isn't that where this money is coming from?
 
True, but big money has ran our govt for years.
this is not just a democratic party thing.


Remember enron? Billions for tax breaks for big oil when gas was $4/GAL, ETC...

I said the Bush bank giveaway was wrong.
Isn't that where this money is coming from?

I also remember Bush owing the city of Arlington 7 million dollars, yet couldn't get anyone to listen to me about it and that included alot of Dems.

So we're establishing that both Reps and Dems are money run and looting our treasury of Billions of dollars, yet will any of you straight ticket voters change?

doubtful.

What I predict you will do is continue to vote straight party line because you will declare that it's better than the alternative of the other party, without really knowing a damned thing.
 
Nothing like a huge conflict of interest. The left seems to do this best. Kinda like Frank's conflict of interest with the AIG.

http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/apr/21/senate-husbands-firm-cashes-in-on-crisis/

On the day the new Congress convened this year, Sen. Dianne Feinstein introduced legislation to route $25 billion in taxpayer money to a government agency that had just awarded her husband's real estate firm a lucrative contract to sell foreclosed properties at compensation rates higher than the industry norms.

Mrs. Feinstein's intervention on behalf of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. was unusual: the California Democrat isn't a member of the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs with jurisdiction over FDIC; and the agency is supposed to operate from money it raises from bank-paid insurance payments - not direct federal dollars.
 
We all forget Cheny and Haliburton?
Bush and big oil?
Cronysim is not limited to any one party.

It is a big problem and should be wiped out, but considering the greed of human nature I doubt that it ever will be.

The reason for eternal vigilence.
 
Nothing like a huge conflict of interest. The left seems to do this best. Kinda like Frank's conflict of interest with the AIG.


See here you are talking conflict of interest about this ( and rightly so) but you had NO problems with Cheney and Haliburton , that was just fine huh?
 
Kerry and the DNC hacks falsely accused Cheney of this and it was later proven that they lied.

Please try to keep up.

See here you are talking conflict of interest about this ( and rightly so) but you had NO problems with Cheney and Haliburton , that was just fine huh?
 
True, but big money has ran our govt for years.
this is not just a democratic party thing.


Remember enron? Billions for tax breaks for big oil when gas was $4/GAL, ETC...

I said the Bush bank giveaway was wrong.
Isn't that where this money is coming from?

Tu quoque; deflection.
 
Hmm Why did Bush push so hard to get the us exempt from war crimes before 911?
Why did they cut off aid to some countries that did not go along with having the USA be exempt from war crimes?

My biggest question is. Why would the most democratic, most humanitarian and Christian beacon of democracy country in the world have any need whatsoever to be exempt from war crimes prosecution?
 
Hmm Why did Bush push so hard to get the us exempt from war crimes before 911?
Why did they cut off aid to some countries that did not go along with having the USA be exempt from war crimes?

My biggest question is. Why would the most democratic, most humanitarian and Christian beacon of democracy country in the world have any need whatsoever to be exempt from war crimes prosecution?

It surely couldn't possibly be because there are so many contries that can be depended on to be truthful.

NAH, that coiuld't be it. I mean just look at how honest the UN is.
 
Hmm Why did Bush push so hard to get the us exempt from war crimes before 911?
Why did they cut off aid to some countries that did not go along with having the USA be exempt from war crimes?

My biggest question is. Why would the most democratic, most humanitarian and Christian beacon of democracy country in the world have any need whatsoever to be exempt from war crimes prosecution?

and what does christ have to do with countries prosecuting for war crimes? :pke:

and i would expect obama to do the same. in fact, i have no doubt obama would exempt us...unless i have missed where he is out there preaching something different. why do you think the US should place ourselves under that court's jurisdiction?
 
and what does christ have to do with countries prosecuting for war crimes? :pke:

and i would expect obama to do the same. in fact, i have no doubt obama would exempt us...unless i have missed where he is out there preaching something different. why do you think the US should place ourselves under that court's jurisdiction?

Based on our history I am not sure we have any right to talk of the trustworthiness of any other nation.
 
Back
Top