Given that no matter who a candidate is, if they are tied to the DEM or REP party do you think they will be able to
make good choices if those choices are not appealing to the Corporate SIG etc...

So in General :
1) What party do you think will stop the corruption in D.C. ?

2) Is it possible for anyone in the REP or DEM party to stop Corruption?

1) What party do you think will stop the corruption in D.C. ?

Hmm well I'm republican so naturally I favor their politics, but both parties have some notable core values that can either be used to help the nation, or be used to sell a candidate while accomplishing little. Its one thing to speak of change and commitment to making America a better place, to deliver on those promises because you believe in them is whats important. Every administration is different, so its much easier to make an opinion on a candidate or president, than an entire party. Although in my lifetime it appears nearly everyone is coming up short.

2) Is it possible for anyone in the REP or DEM party to stop Corruption?

Not altogether, no. However there are massive improvements that can be made, if we get some real leadership up their that is. There have already been presidents to progress the state of the nation by leaps and bounds, while improving the system, but truly great presidents seem few and far between. Will any of the 3 candidates remaining be a truly great president that reduces the corruption of the system? Well thats hard to say because actions speak louder than words, and right now its up to all of us to decide who's words are most likely to equate to some real change, and unfortunately thats not an easy thing to do, because many politicians are slick, and the number one thing that sells a candidate is a promise of change.

Neither of the two major parties. They are both tied too strongly to outside influences.



The most humorous thing about this question is that you assume the two major parties are any different from each other. They are not. Neither one will lead to change. Neither one stands for freedom, limited government, or fiscal responsibility. They're a mess, and voting for either one as a "lesser of two evils" vote still begets evil. Sorry, I'm not ready to sacrifice my ideals just so that a person I don't like can be elected over a person I don't like ever so slightly more.

I Agree with you that "actions speak louder than words" ! The actions of both parties Prove that they put
personal gain before the welfare of America ! And, I might add that they have had "DECADES" to change their ways, but
HAVE NOT !!

I think the reason for "a lack of good Presidents" is because they don't have to do a good job ! No matter what they do
there will always be a REP or DEM in the White House ! So why not fill their pockets with taxpayers money?

When America starts to vote out the REP-DEM Monopoly I'll bet you $100 that we will start seeing REPS&DEMS
doing back flips for America, and making a our current problems magially diminish ! But in our current political system
they "ONLY" have to be a little better the the other corrupt party.......
Thus America looses !



Maybe you haven't read my screen name yet?

Is it even possible for questions 1 & 2 to be accomplished in any way? Isn't that rather utopian? Who could stop corruption completely? I don't see alternatives to the two party structure that would be any better at governing. What evidence suggests they would be any different? There will always be a certain degree of corruption in government. Whether it's some bureaucrat taking money under the table or granting privileges to friends, that thing will always go on. The real question has to do with what politiciasn will do when corruption is uncovered, as well as what their programs are to get this country back on track.

If the American Voters use that "Self fulfilling Prophecy" that stopping corruption is impossible then we should never try right?
Ending 100% of corruption is not realistic, but ending the blatant abuses of power that the REPS&DEMS have been doing over
the last few decades that's at your finger tips!

If we voted out the REP-DEM Monopoly, Americans would be that much more willing to vote out any corrupt party. So the next party
that comes a long wanting to SERVE AMERICA will be on their best behavior!

But I see 3 big obstacles
1) The system will not allow for a non-REP or DEM person to win the Prez.
2) The person who wins will be responsible for decades of corruption. This task will be a grand undertaking and that person will be crucified
for trying to reverse the problems inherited from the REPS&DEMS.
3) I think the American people would rather be lied to, live on credit and go down with the titanic.(This is what the REPS&DEMS are doing to America)

So what do you want to do Bite the bullet and fight or go with the status quo and sink?

So do you support the current Obscene amount of corruption? Do you think it's health for America ?
Do you think the REPS&DEMS will change ?

As long as ~48% of Americans vote for the REP candidate and ~48% of Americans vote for the DEM candidate they
will tell you that your support proves that you approve of what they are doing !!!!!!!

Thus you get the Government you deserve !!!!!!!

(I will be voting for Nader so I won't feel bad for destroying America)

Calm down... you're being hysterical. Talk with us and not at us for a second. You've only been on this board a short while, and I willing to bet your opinion is already marginalized by a lot of debators on this board.

It's one thing to say we need change, it's another to fully think of how we accomplish this change.

There is no bull horn that will reach enough of Americans to make this change. The change you talk about would take time.. one problem, there is not enough time for this to happen, because the control of two parties in the two party system.

Or it will come at the destruction of one or both parties. However, it's tough to see how that is realistically going to happen. It would be like what Joe Leiberman did on a National scale. If it were going to happen there couldn't be a better climate then this election year.

Your problem, IMO is you don't read enough Shakespeare.

What's in a name? That which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet.

...or just as bitter.. ... ok... that's a taste, but I couldn't resist!

The system protects the system, and we the voters... really aren't empowered to change it. We are not ants or bees or some science fiction creatures that are able to communicate our mind into a collective thought to write in the correct name on the ballot.

You could make a sitcom show..... "Who should be are next President" But who would say that person wouldn't be affiliated with either party. And if he was elected... SO WHAT?!?!?

Last i checked... the President doesn't create laws. So how do you change 500 plus politicians that do make laws.

Would we just vote for anyone who claimed not to be Dem or Repub, what if there is 2 or 3 non Repubs or Dems??


We do get the Government we deserve, and you get to waste your vote on Nader. I think Nader is a brilliant man. But he has also become a man of brilliant insanity. As Albert Einstein once wrote:

(Insanity is) doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

But hey how does that make us any different right Anyways... I just think you chould chill out befor you pop an important blood vessel or give your self an ulcer or something. But it's up to you.

1) What party do you think will stop the corruption in D.C. ?

I do not want to sound cynical, but it would take major change much larger than we have seen in this country to stop the corruption. Political parties aside, is there a system of government that is immune to corruptibility? Doubtful. So we tend to want a system that benefits our group, whatever that is.

I prefer the Democratic party because it seems to take into consideration the plight of "the little guy" or, more specifically, people who have less power in contrast to, say, pharmaceutical companies, energy conglomerates, or firms like Halliburton.

2) Is it possible for anyone in the REP or DEM party to stop Corruption?

Not individually. And not even the great Ralph Nader, if he had a snowball's chance in hell of winning the White House, could stop the corruption.

If we had a revolution in this country with an idealistic person in charge, it would not (I'm afraid) take long before the incorruptible person started to make compromises with his/her integrity and start to have a government more similar to the one that had been replaced, or worse. Either that, or that person could be eliminated by factions of his/her group that helped put him/her into power.

It's a fault of the human race. Even good intentions can produce some surprisingly bad outcomes.

I agree. One of my favorite writers, the polish AP reporter Ryscard Kapuscinski once wrote from a Congolese jail what he thought about idealistic revolutionaries. It was a time in African history where all of the inspirational leaders who brought about liberation were slowly devolving into the self-interested pigs from animal farm, and he, Kapuscinski, was wasting away in this dank Congolese prison cell, sentenced for execution by a regime that had developed little tolerance for western journalists.

He ended up being freed from the cell by a bored, average and anonymous prison guard -- Kapuscinski never learned the guardsmen's name -- who was walking up and down the prison corridors trying to sell some homemade necklaces or maybe bracelets, some kind of assorted jewelry. After striking up a conversation, the guardsmen asked if Kapuscinski would like to buy some jewlry, and Kapuscinski promised him that if he would let him free, he'd go back to the UN base and buy some of his jewelry from him. The guy let him free, and in return, the journalist bought some of his bracelets or whatever.

Kapuscinski ended the passage with a line that I'll paraphrase, a line that I'm sure bristled the hairs on the editor back in Communist Poland. I can't find the book, or the quote online, and I'd be climbing a steep hill to attempt his prose, but he ended the passage with the observation that often the anonymous underling trying to make a few bucks on the side is infinitely more humane than the supposedly incorruptible leaders we anoint to root out such corruption.

I am not at all hysterical , just pointing out so facts.




Keeping the Status Quo is a better solution when it is obvious that things are bad and are not getting better?



Reading Shakespeare does not fix anything !
Giving yourself an excuse to do nothing about the state of your country is pathetic ! Do you think the Civil war was fun or easy ?
Do you think the American Revolutions was a walk in the park ?
Read the Declaration of Independence and compare the REP-DEM Monopoly the British.




So isn't going back and forth between REPS&DEMS Insanity? I mean we KNOW what's going to happen !
They'll create big problems, more debt and they will blame it on the other party ! And I bet they will give themselves a raise too !

You actually helped prove my point.
"doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."

So to get a different result we should not vote for a REP or a DEM !! That' wuold just be Insanity !

That's a good one I think I'll use it !

Obscene amount of corruption?, that's awfully big brush your painting with isn't it? What evidence can you post that proves that's the case? What's the differencebetween obscene corruption and that which is moderate or even minor? McCain-Feingold, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, and other bills are evidence that some reform is possible. As long as humans run government and other collectively organized bodies, corruption will hold sway.

So you think the current amount of is good ? If you allow officials to be corrupt they will be !!!!
You must not have any long tem memory or you would remember all the stuff that was in the news the last few
years about corruption.

The names Abramoff, Scooter Libby, DeLaye, ,Spitzers,William J. Jefferson don't ring a bell?
What about all the DEMS & REPS That said (Voted) B. Clinton "DID NOT LIE IN FEDERAL COURT"?
What about all the era marks and pork barrel projects? Do you realize that the biggest effect of corruption
is debt? Debt that YOU the American Taxpayer has to pay!!!!!!!!!


http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article12294.htm
http://www.listafterlist.com/tabid/57/list...his+Decade.aspx
http://www.defraudingamerica.com/classic_d...ng_america.html
http://www.nola.com/news/index.ssf/2008/04...ldest_brot.html
http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/0309/p01s03-uspo.html
http://congressionalbadboys.com/banking.htm
http://www.jstor.org/pss/2132193
http://www.boycottliberalism.com/Scandals.htm
http://www.listafterlist.com/tabid/57/list...of+the+90s.aspx

Remember Nader has and will fight against all odds to stop corruption !!!! You can vote for him too !!!!!!!
Ron Paul will bring back the Constitution. That's better than any thing the REP or DEM parties are offering !!!!
America has "BIG" Problems !! If we stay with the REP-DEM Monopoly it will only get worse !!
If you don't take action against these parties you deserve to suffer from their leadership(Lack there of) !!!
Sorry that the truth hurts but it's still the truth !!!!!

Nader isn't exactly the saint that you make him out to be. He is in the pockets of the trial lawyers, busted up a union of his own workers, and made money off of the stock market that he so abhors. Ditto Ron Paul, who had no problem bringing home $400 million in pork to his home district. Does that mean that either man would be a horrible president? Not really, it just shows that they are human, justifications aside. Once again, third party status and idealism can't replace human nature. Haven't we had enough revolutions, ideologies, and politicians that have proven that by now? Sorry, listing a few corrupt people like Libby and the gang doesn't prove that a libertarian or a Nader campaign would have less troubles. While we can't judge them in regards to leadership, as the American public doesn't trust them to govern, we have to look at a microcosm of how they would govern-their party. It just so happens that Harry Browne and some "reform" minded LP members have been having quite the civil war.

I just dont care! that this has nothing to do with the topic, I just gotta rant! you know, just rant!. A little bit.

Greetings from a new computer. Brand new, actually.

It's profoundly frustrating to see all the Hope™ and charisma fizzle out of Barack Obama when I think he would make a better nominee than Hillary Clinton -- or is that a better nominee without Hillary Clinton. At this point, he hardly has legs to stand on.

But it is doubly, deeply, disastrously distressing to see these two democrats fork each other's eyes out with no regard to what this mindless turf war will mean for the rest of the nation when it puts the Republican Party -- after a d-d-decade! of scandalous insanity -- back onto the gears of power. I mean, My God, the AMBITION!

The democratic party is the political tragedy of the modern world. Never before in human history has a single nation had so much power and promise relative to its 186 global neighbors, but all that promise and power is for naught if we can't have at least two working, useful, constructive parties capable of keeping the other in check. I mean, for all intents in purposes, we're becoming a single-party state. And conservative values aren't served when the conservative party is the only gang in town. You need competition, you really do.

Which begs the question: Why are we democrats incapable of winning? What's that line, democrats fall in love, republicans fall in line?

Let me rewind and try to remember where I was going with this. Right. The following is from the voice of Elizabeth Edwards:




Seriously! America's attention span is to our politics what Alcohol is to a teenage driver. We can't see what's coming, let alone react to it in time, and well, WERTZ IM CALLING YOU OUT:

Its voters like you who are slowly dissolving the democrat's prospects in 2008. Voters who are so blinded by this media-driven spectacle of contrived outrage and personified politics that we've all but forgotten why we're in this. I've been pretty p-o'd at Hillary, too, so I've fallen for the trap, too, but how can we take two ideological similar politicians and well, OK...

Here's a short, off-the-cusp list of what we've lost over the past 8 years:


New Orleans
The Twin Towers
Our standing in the world
A multi-trillion dollar surplus turned into a 9-trillion dollar deficit
The liquidity of our major financial corporations
The strength of our dollar
The lives of countless Iraqi citizens, alongside 4,000 + Americans in not one, but two poorly-led, poorly-planned wars
Habeas Corpus


Imagine you are a sitting congressman, a GOP rep in the house who was elected shortly before all this stuff went down. For the past 8 years you, like many of your democratic colleagues across the aisle, have been writing checks to special interests groups, spending your time as you please, paying absolutely no heed to the impending crises coming to thwack America out of her geopolitical orbit. The country goes to war, loses, the housing market explodes, border security collapses to the point where mafia-like violence claims Mexican border towns like Juarez, the dollar sinks so low that the Ghanaian dollar is now worth more than the American dollar, and North Korea gets the bomb.

Then, after all that, the country re-elects John McCain and the Republican party simply because Hillary Clinton cries in a diner, whereas Barack Obama orders orange juice when he eats at a diner.

I mean, if I were that hardly-hypothetical congressman, I would wake up from my suburban DC slumber is tears of laughter every single night! Is there a better, more frivolous job than US congressman? It's like being a security guard at K-Mart, except that you don't have to actually stop security threats -- just talk a lot about stopping them -- and you get to play more golf. Plus you get your picture in the paper.

All you have to do is make sure you don't stop wearing your flag lapel pin, and oh yeah, don't say anything that could be construed as "elitist" by your fellow multi-million dollar opponents.

I mean, we Americans, we've ruined it. There was once a time when a scandal or -gate meant someone in power had broken the law. Tea Pot Dome, for instance. Scandals meant something back then. What happened to us?

Comin to a conclusion, now: I don't care if you're the staunchest libertarian who revels in seeing Obama flounder, or the most enthusiastic Obama supporter who gains something from Hillary's gaffes. The question I have for everyone is this: What kind of country are we going to be if we keep coming on AD and turning on CNN and firing up the comment sections to discuss whether or not Obama wears a flag pin, or why Hillary Clinton lied about Bosnia? We deserve to be smitten with meteorites, one whole galactic-sized skittles packet of meteorites, poured out like a bag of marbles across this country. I'd elaborate more on what I think God should reasonably do to America, but then one day, if I decide to run for president, anything I say will be trumped up and insinuated and pieced together into a wildly stupid diversion. So I'll spare you guys.

Last thought: At this point in the evolution of our mass media, elections have become less a process through which leaders are chosen than a cultural ritual in which the ever-constricting lines of political correctness are re-inforced and tightened.

And so many of you enlightened conservatives who peer down your noses at politcal correctness when it involves race or gender are the first to feign outrage when a bunch of Internet liberals call Patreaus Betray-Us, or Barack Obama stops wearing a lapel pin.

Grow up America. You're really turning out to be a stink bomb. I don't know much about what the 21st century portends, but I'm having a hard time imagining that this wonderful 8 years is the dawn of another American Century! Ha! Long Live Europe, Africa, Australia, some other "God Blessed" place. If I could curse here I would. Goodnight.




...I kinda wish Joe Biden had won the nomination. Never thought I'd say that.

I agree that Nader or Paul are not saints ! But they both are much better that what the DNC and GOP are producing as
candidates !!

Look to sit there and try and convince yourself that picking a REP or DEM is the best for America is truly insane or idiotic !!!!!!

The state of America is due to the leadership of the REPS&DEMS !
They have had more than 150yrs to figure out how to run America ! It's obvious they can't or don't want to make America
a better place for everyone. Don't get me wrong they are making America a fabulous place for a select few, but it comes
at the expense of the vast majority of Americas !!!!!!

Going from tweedle dumb to tweedle dumber is not a good solution! Picking the lesser of two evils still leaves you with evil !!!!
As long as you allow the REPS&DEMS to blackmail you in to picking between them you will always only have two bad choices !!!!!!!







I hate to rain on your imaginary parade, but The Democratic Party lost to a Retarded, Ex-druggy alcoholic, war deserting,
, failed business man, cheerleader!!!!

!!!! TWICE !!!!!!!!

I don't see how anyone with an ounce of wit can make the conclusion that "The democratic party is the political tragedy of the
modern world. " It's obvious that what the DEMS are selling people aren't buying!

If after all of the destruction and may lay that the REPS/Bush's have brought to America, a Democratic party (Being the only
other choice allowed by our rigged voting system) can't win they need to flat out quit politics !!!!!