Liberal Group Puts Two Democrats on Its 'Most Corrupt' List

[carpro]

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewPolitics.asp?Page=\Politics\archive\200509\POL20050926a.html

Liberal Group Puts Two Democrats on Its 'Most Corrupt' List
By Susan Jones
CNSNews.com Senior Editor
September 26, 2005

(CNSNews.com) - A liberal watchdog group has listed what it considers the "13 most corrupt members of Congress," and while 11 of them are Republicans, two are Democrats.

Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) says the "most tainted Members of Congress" include Democrat Reps. William Jefferson of Louisiana, who is under investigation for alleged misuse of his office; and Maxine Waters of California, whose relatives reportedly made lots of money doing business with people and businesses that Waters has helped.

 

[Daisy]

And?

 

[fromtheright]

Carpro,

I gotta go with Daisy on this one. If the report had said there were 11 corrupt officials and it highlighted that two of them were Republicans we would be howling at the slant against the GOP.

 

[carpro]

It's a liberal group. You would naturally expect the list to be loaded with Republicans. It is.

The fact that two democrats made the list is , to me, indicative of the egregious nature of their corruption. It would be good to note who they are and remember.

It is also worth noting that one of them comes from a state that is requesting the federal government just hand over $250 billion to them. Doesn't instill confidence in the state's ability to handle it properly.

Of course, Louisiana as a whole, is arguably the most politically corrupt state in the nation. IMO
But that's another subject, I believe.

 

[msinave]

actually, carpro, i believe mississippi holds that, er, distinction.

 

[Daisy]

Originally posted by carpro:
The fact that two democrats made the list is , to me, indicative of the egregious nature of their corruption.

This group, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), considers itself to be mainstream rather than liberal. I suppose to some people, not conservative translates to liberal with no middle ground possible.

From their About Us: Background page (linkie):

We believe there is a niche for a mainstream group that helps real people who have suffered injustice bring or defend legal actions stemming from the conduct of unscrupulous government officials. The groups that have pioneered this type of legal advocacy are avowedly conservative and extremist: Judicial Watch; the Rutherford Institute; the National Legal and Policy Center; to name just a few.
Conservative groups such as these have no real parallel in the mainstream. There are a number of non-partisan groups that address government honesty, including Common Cause, the Center for Public Integrity, and Democracy 21. While we applaud their efforts, we have noted that these groups focus principally on research and legislation. They do not use litigation to target outrageous conduct, nor do they bring the message of injustice to the people the way their conservative counterparts do. Because these public interest organizations focus mostly on policy issues and not on obstacles faced by ordinary citizens, these groups have not mobilized a shift in public opinion on the issue of government honesty. The mainstream needs a parallel to the conservative groups mentioned above — CREW will fill that niche.

As they consider themselves mainstream and non-partisan, they have included corrupt officials from both parties. That the list includes more Republicans than Democrats can be attributed to the Republicans currently being in power - mere opportunity.

 

[carpro]

They consider themselves "mainstream". Their actions and their positioning on issues literally screams "liberal".

Another liberal group trying to pass themselves off as moderates or "mainliners". Hardly new. I'm not surprised you buy into it.

 

[Monergist]

Anyone know what their beef is with Santorum? I'm just curious.

 

[carpro]

You mean besides the fact that he's a conservative Republican?

"Rick Santorum (R-PA) is a second-term United States Senator, representing the people of Pennsylvania. Sen. Santorum’s ethics issues stem from the manner in which he funded his children’s education and the close timing between the Senator’s introduction of a weather service bill benefiting for-profit weather companies and a donation from a private Pennsylvania weather company to Sen. Santorum’s political action committee."

 

[Daisy]

Originally posted by carpro:
They consider themselves "mainstream". Their actions and their positioning on issues literally screams "liberal".

Another liberal group trying to pass themselves off as moderates or "mainliners". Hardly new. I'm not surprised you buy into it.

Well, now that I've looked at their legal actions....

(btw, please look up "literally"

(pet peeve)).

Monergist,

They didn't specify what against Santorum. Could be that he wants to prevent the National Weather Service from collecting and disseminating for free information that certain campaign contributors, such as AccuWeather, would like to sell. Trashing a vital agency like the NWS is bad, doing it for money is worse, but surely it's not one of the most corrupt acts....

 

[carpro]

Santorum appears just to be icing. The cake is Tom DeLay. They want him destroyed really bad.