<p>Some of you may know that my Congressman has decided not to run for re-election for his relatively-safe seat because of the little matter of a drunk driving arrest which exposed his second family. Ok. Fine. Whatever. After a huge amount of angst and seeing all the good potential candidates refuse to run (I wonder if they have multiple families), my party has tonight decided on a candidate. Who, you may ask, have they chosen? Our “representative” to the MTA (transportation) Board, that’s who. We have the worst mass transportation in the region, one of the longest average commuting times in the entire nation, and this horse’s butt of a political hack has done nothing about that in the years he’s been in his perk-filled position, but he’s running for Congress? I absolutely can’t believe it. Somewhere, in a dark room, George Soros is sending out mind control orders to republicans in this country. There can simply be no other excuse.</p>
<p>zoosermom, now you know why I go to bed at night close to tears after watching the news. Moronic actions, lack of ethics and decency, and an even bigger lack of comon sense has become the norm for BOTH parties.</p>
<p>I’m with Groucho Marx on this one when he said “I would never want to join a club that would want me as a member.” In the case of American politics today, I just change it to say “I don’t ever want to vote for someone who actually WANTS to run for the office”.</p>
<p>Bullet, that’s so true. Maybe we’re just so tough on our politicians that good men (and wome) won’t run? I don’t know, but I am appalled. This nomination would be like, I don’t know, ALMOST like the republicans putting forth a Klansman in a black district or a Minuteman in a hispanic district. How can one expect to win when the candidate is viewed as the enemy of the constituency? I disagree strongly with the democratic candidate philosophically, but he lives in my neighborhood and is a good man, so he may get my vote in protest of the GOP slapping my face.</p>
<p>"Some of you may know that my Congressman has decided not to run for re-election for his relatively-safe seat because of the little matter of a drunk driving arrest which exposed his second family. "</p>
<p>Wow! How’d I miss that story, which must have gone national.</p>
<p>“Wow! How’d I miss that story, which must have gone national.”</p>
<p>Vito Fossella. A/K/A Vito Libido.</p>
<p>He was at the Memorial Day Parade being as arrogant as he was when we were growing up. Lovely wife (also from the area), three beautiful kids. Mistress, one beautiful child. Lots of sordidity. Apparently, they hooked up on a junket with then-Speaker Hastert who was so disgusted that it effectively ended her career and my Congressman was banned from further official travel. Not unofficial travel, though, which is the subject of his ETHICS INVESTIGATION. Arrrrrrgh.</p>
<p>The R’s aren’t any more moronic than professed near D’s. It is just that the R’s were throwing stones and made a point of having more ‘family values’ than the D’s. People bought the line and expected that Standard for their elected R’s. </p>
<p>I would consider R’s being feeble minded than moronic or imbeciles. Some are considered pretty good idiots. :)</p>
<p>"The R’s aren’t any more moronic than professed near D’s. It is just that the R’s were throwing stones and made a point of having more ‘family values’ than the D’s. People bought the line and expected that Standard for their elected R’s. "</p>
<p>While that may be true generally, it’s not the issue here. They nominated a member of the MTA board for a seat representing Staten Island. It’s inconceivable to nominate a candidate who is accepted to be an enemy of his potential constituents.</p>
<p>Hmm. Out here in small town America we actually have a lot of good people running for office. Some of them are even Republicans. 
I knew good people of both parties in CT also. </p>
<p>Perhaps the problem is more big city politics…There are so many entrenched party hacks jockeying for favors on both sides of the aisle that it’s hard to imagine how anyone who is even moderately idealistic manages to break through. Unless they have billions of $$ and can just step in at the top.</p>
<p>“There are so many entrenched party hacks jockeying for favors on both sides of the aisle that it’s hard to imagine how anyone who is even moderately idealistic manages to break through. Unless they have billions of $$ and can just step in at the top.”</p>
<p>I think that’s exactly right. This guy is a party man who is a serial board member. He made a lot of money years ago and has been spreading it around ever since. Much as it pains me, in this instance, the democrats have a better candidate. He is a good, hardworking man of the community.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Our society paints politics as a dirty, dishonorable occupation that no decent, honest person would ever do, and assumes that politicians are the scum of the earth unless proven otherwise. Then we wonder why so many of our politicians are slimeballs. Perhaps if we portrayed it as an honorable profession, albeit one that has become corrupted by problematic individuals and needs to be cleaned up, in our discourse and pop culture, honorable people would be willing to run.</p>
<p>Also, politics are about power, and power, as the cliche goes, corrupts. I love the novel All the King’s Men…it’s a great portrayal of an honorable idealist who goes bad under the temptations of power.</p>
<p>They’re all the same. :(</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Wait a second. These people (politicians) force their will upon others and you’re blaming the people they “rule” for the politicians’ corruptness? Did you ever think that the fundamentals of the system are corrupt? Do you blame rape victims for getting raped violently?</p>
<p>I think there is a real yearning for a THIRD party. The two party system is not working, and it has not worked for a long time. Both parties have good ideas about a lot of things, and I strongly believe we need a third party to combine all the good things that the GOP and the DNC have to offer. </p>
<p>Nancy Pelosi and her group promised us so much during 2006, and they have delivered very little. The leadership off the DNC is very incompetent, and they are very lucky that they are politicians. </p>
<p>WE NEED A CHANGE FROM THE TWO PARTY SYSTEM</p>
<p>I think what jessie is trying to say is that since we all think of politicians as slimeballs only people who ARE slimeballs get into it. The rape analogy is entirely invalid since we’re talking about two different things. Society is not one thing getting taken advantage of by politics, politics are a PART of society. A better but still not perfect analogy would be a chubby person complaining all day every day about how they can’t lose any weight and can’t eat right or exercise, and constantly getting fatter and fatter.</p>
<p>Edit: A two party national system is pretty essential to the “winner take all” system that we have right now. If there were a viable third party it would nearly ensure the victory of the party furthest away from it on the political spectrum, which may not share any ideals with the majority of people.</p>
<p>
Yeah, but who votes the politicians into office?</p>
<p>I’m supporting a good friend running for state legislature right now – a highly intelligent, accomplished, honorable, and kind young man. It’s beyond ugly how he has to spend his time on the phone, every day, begging everyone he knows for money. That’s how it’s done…and we don’t even know if he’s going to get the job at the end of the campaign. It’s the most thankless, miserable task I’ve had the misfortune to watch, and there’s no job I want that badly. Once I’ve seen it up close, it really isn’t so surprising that people don’t want to run.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Not me. That’s all that matters. If it is okay for politicians to impose their will upon those who do not endorse politics (or just their politics in particular) then it should also be okay for me to impose my will upon politicians. Of course, this is not the case. They do not allow for reciprocity and are thus logically inconsistent.</p>
<p>The point is that it’s not just individuals which cause corruption; the whole system is based on this ideal. And when the system is based on corruption, you should not be surprised by its results.</p>
<p>afruff, nobody wants to hear your 10000th rendition of why you’re an anarchist. Really.</p>
<p>1of42,</p>
<p>I wasn’t preaching about anarchism. I was talking about how corruption is not limited to one group or person but forms the basis for the system which is how there is so much corruption.</p>
<p>I decided to resurrect this thread because I know you’re all waiting eagerly for the next installment in the saga.</p>
<p>So, the candidate nominated by my party, who respresents the MTA and is viewed as the enemy of the constituency, has a new opponent. A man running on the libertarian line – but if he doesn’t get that nod, he’ll try as an anarchist. (No, I’m not kidding.) Who is this mystery candidate you may ask? Oh, I’ll tell you. It is – wait for it – the republican’s son. But this is NOT an attack on his father, ok?</p>