Slashdot Mirror
Sen. Ted "Tubes" Stevens Is Indicted
Many readers are letting us know about the indictment of Sen. Ted Stevens on seven counts of making false statements on his financial disclosure forms. We discussed the raid on the senator's house a while back. Everyone's favorite technologically challenged senator is the longest-serving Republican in the history of the upper house. An Alaskan paper gives deep background on the probe that has ensnared Stevens and a number of other Alaska political figures.
while this guy is an asshat, Series of Tubes as an analogy works just fine. This is one of those things other clueless asshats giggle at.
People like Ted Stevens don't go to pound-me-in-the-ass prison.
Some pigs are more equal than others.
...into people claiming that everything is the fault of one party or the other and that all members of one of the two parties are corrupt.
How did he stay in office so long if there was already evidence of corruption in 2003 and 2004?
text of the indictment is now available.
It was a part of the scheme that STEVENS, while during that same time period that he was concealing his continuing receipt of things of value from ALLEN and VECO from 1999 to 2006, received and accepted solicitations for multiple official actions from ALLEN and other VECO employees, and knowing that STEVENS could and did use his official position and his office on behalf of VECO during that same time period.
That sounds like good old-fashioned bribery to me, but with our screwed-up laws it's probably a lot easier to convict a politician for lying about the bribes than for taking the bribes.
And when will Dodd and the Democratic senators who got their mortgages personally handed to them by bank CEOs receive the same treatment? I'm not a partisan in this, and I do enjoy seeing Stevens go down, but this guy is just the tip of the iceberg. I suspect that most of Congress would have to be indicted if a sweeping investigation were done.
What he is charged with is so petty compared to the greater good he has done that will be a crying shame.
So, you're saying... as long as he keeps the money flowing to you, you are willing to overlook lies and deception? Do you think he's clean as a whistle in all his other dealings, too?
$nice = $webHosting + $domainNames + $sslCerts
A rich powerful man only goes to prison if a richer, more powerful man wants him there. I wonder who he pissed off? Gates? Branson?
mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
Just because some folks don't understand satire.
God forbid if our founding Fathers posted here...then again, I'm sure they've run into the same thing and folks burned their pamphlets.
I'll never stop. I'll keep pushing buttons until the cops stop me...OK, maybe a little more....but I'll REALLY stop when the Government points a gun at me or puts me in a "Free Speech Zone" - see Bush administration.
Until then he is innocent until proven guilty.
People in positions of power shouldn't get such benefits. Every last one of them should be set under The Sword of Damocles, hanging by the barest of thread. If you consider robbing the rest of the country for the benefit of Alaska a good thing, especially with the vast riches it possesses, then there's not a hell of a lot to tell you. Especially with your whining about "liberals". Socialism must be a good thing when you're the one who benefits. But when somebody actually needs it, they're a bunch of leeches. Kinda sick thinking.
What?
Leavenworth is a federal prison. If you have bothered to watch the news there have been more than a few murder/rapist types that have been going there. I don't know where you get the idea that Federal prison is soft or how you managed to get modded informative for that patently false nonsense.
I can only assume that you are confused by Alcatraz being a recreational area now. Alcatraz was not a pleasant place when it was a federal prison. Back then the tour of the place lasted a bit longer than an afternoon.
The only change I can believe in is what I find in my couch cushions.
There is a great fear that nobody else (the up-and-comer Mark Begich for example) will be able to pull the kind of strings in Washington that Stevens was able to pull -- at least not for decades.
Ah well there's the catch. So, Alaskans don't care if they elect dumb, corrupt politicians just so long as they bring in the pork for the state? I've often wondered about the electees from Alaska. Murkowski... now there's another story. He resigns to become governor and then appoints his daughter in his place?
What about the common good of the country as a whole? Your senator does not merely pass laws that affect only Alaska, but all the other 300 million of us. And powerful, corrupt politicians like yours have been coming up with dumbass laws that affect all the US for decades. For just one fun example, how about the Unsolicited Commercial Electronic Mail Choice Act.
Our state certainly needs to rid itself of corruption. If Stevens is convicted it will be a sad day.
I'm a bit dumbfounded by this. What on earth could be sad about kicking out a senator that has been proven corrupt? Oh.. yeah, he's powerful and brings money and investment, not to mention I'm sure great parties with the oil execs at the Chalet.
I know what it's like to lose a powerful government rep. Tom Foley was speaker of the house until he was the first speaker to be unseated in ages (or maybe forever, I forget). His opponent, Nethercutt, a replublican, chided Foley for being in office so long--how does one get to be speaker otherwise?--and promised to serve only two terms. Haha. Well, that promise went out the window. Anyway, eastern Washington survived gaining a lying newbie representative, I'm sure Alaska will get over this fiasco.
-Aaron
I'm sorry, but do you really think bike trails and fountains are pork?
No, they're not investments in science in engineering - which we surely need more of - but these two contribute to the public's physical and mental health, respectively. No small matter, that.
So you can laugh all you want to...
It is just horrible that at a time when the national debt is so high we still throw money around like its nothing.
Except that it IS nothing to them. They'll just make more money and/or sell us out to countries who hate us! What do they care? The American taxpayer is footing the bill for their well-being. And pensions. I say, put them on Social Security like the rest of us, and allow their salaries to be commensurate to their approval rating. We'll get some useful things happening then.
They deserve it. They've completely screwed themselves by not having even a nodding look at conservatism. Republicans had their time to prove themselves, and they proved they're just as bad and hypocritical as the democrats, and now they're going to lose the exectuive and legislative branches.
Many people, regardless of their "party" or lack thereof, are fiscally conservative and socially liberal in their day to day lives. We generally don't want to pay 90% in taxes, and we don't generally care what people do in their own homes, in their own lives, and we prefer if they don't get involved in telling us what we should be doing in our own lives either.
democrats and republicans have both failed completely, frankly I don't know what the difference is, other than republican's extremism is religion and democrat's extremism is environmental.
I'm a satanic clam.
But they've got sod all to do with the federal government. Recreational bike trails and fountains are inherently local.
explore and develop our natural resources like oil, gold and copper
? Really? The letter next to your name determines whether you will allow things to be dug out of the ground? Or perhaps its just that adhering to environmental regulations already in place might cut into profits a little?
Prediction: The real iPhone killer is going to be sex robots from Japan. Think about it.
Will be interesting to see, as the ultimate act of hypocrisy, if the next President pardons him ala Clinton's forgiveness of bigtime Chicago Machine Dem Dan Rostenkowski, who now collects his congressional pension despite similar acts (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_Rostenkowski). Sen Stevens likely won't be convicted in time for President Bush to possibly react.
When I'm too old to understand what the fuck I'm talking about, I'll resign from congress and not try to legislate it.
If he's too old to get it, it's time to get out. I wouldn't be angry about some other old man not understanding new technology, but he has power over it. That's dangerous.
Not a damn thing.
If the states are derelict in their responsibility then the citizens of those states can vote in a new state government. If they continue to vote in an irresponsible government that doesn't attend to their needs, then I'm not shedding a tear. People tend to get the government they deserve.
The only time the Feds have an obligation to intervene is when the states are abridging the rights of the citizens of the United States. A state's minority not getting what they want is does not give carte blanche to the Feds to "remedy" the situation.
If this was just my grandfather ranting about the kids today, I'd smile and nod.
But this is a man who chaired the United States Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation during the 109th Congress, and is still on the committee today. This is someone who is going to be making direct policy decisions about the internet, not some harmless rambling old man.
Then again, he's also been the chairman of the Senate Ethics Committe. They really know how to pick them, don't they?
You don't have to be convicted of anything to receive a presidential pardon (see Nixon, Richard).
One good option for him is to win reelection, then resign to allow the Republican Governor to appoint another Republican to serve out his term. For that Bush will grant him a pardon on the last day "for the 40 years of service to the country", and he will fade away.
I'm aging rapidly, I bought a new game and had no idea if my machine was good for it.
If they're that useful, then local governments can pay for them, unless they're in national parks. I'm no small-government fanatic, but even I don't see why my taxes should help improve the lives of cyclists in Idaho.
Don't straw man me - I never said bridges to nowhere weren't pork. You and I are 100% on the same page there. But my questions remain unanswered - what do we do about national parks, interstate trails & parks, the D.C.?
And our own disagreement brings another question to mind: how do we see determine which projects are legitimate expenses for government and which are "simply a luxury?" Maybe we should choose some group of people to represent us and vote on it...
I'm sorry I did not mean that in general these projects were all bad. But it is obvious between a legitimate need and pork. When you are building random stuff in the middle for no particular reason. And the federal government typically doesn't pay for projects like that.
Heck I am all for beautifying a city. I live near Weston...the poster child for a planned city and they did a nice job. But did the state of Florida or the United States government pay for it...no. Weston has higher property taxes and its residents ay for it. But thats how it should be. They footed the bill on their own city. I have never heard anyone from Weston complain that the taxes were too hgih because they wanted to live in a city with nice parks, land scaping, fountains, and bike trails.
My point was simply Senators should not be having the sole goal of making the most money for their state. Sure they are going to be an advocate for their state but that doesn't mean that they can get away with stealing money from the federal government just add figures to his campaign. going to be an advocate for their state but that doesn't mean that they can get away with stealing money from the federal government just add figures to his campaign.
Usually congressmen first become wealthy, then become politicians for the power. I don't think any elected official has aspirations for office for the over the table pay.
I'm not not licking toads.
My first reaction is 'hell no!', but then I think about how much money the federal government steals...err takes from the states through taxes. The states then have to jump through hoops to get that money sent back to them. Look at how states have to comply with federal laws to get road money back that should have never left the state in the first place. Schools are another good example. At the end of the day it's all about control. The federal gov. wants more of it and sadly the states are for the most part letting them have it.
Which describes almost every "red" state in the Union.
This helps explain why the Republicans are no longer the party of small government. It strikes me as rich irony that the party that decries the existence of the 'welfare state' is dependent upon welfare from the democtratic states in order to keep the pork coming in, which is what keeps them in office.
"Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
You have to be kidding me. US Senators might only be paid a base salary of 165K or so, but their ability to generate wealth far exceeds the ability of many corporate CEOs.
Quote from Forbes:
Lindsay Blanton
RadioReference.com
Why do you have to label everyone and everything a liberal? It makes me sad that everyone has to be so partisan these days. It is like people actually believe the things that Rush Limbaugh says...which is scary to me. He is a polarizing force that skews things so that everything is the fault of the scary "liberals". Which is stupid, considering the Republicans have been in power and actually held the presidency, the house, and the senate simultaneously and still did nothing. This polarization crap is just like religion fanatics going at it. It reminds me of the guy who went and started to shoot up a church because the "liberal movement" was destroying the country. Seriously, we are all just people. We may have different views but we aren't going to get anywhere if we blame everything wrong in the world on liberalism or conservatism.
Support a great indie game: http://www.abaddon360.com
I love that all the conservatives think I'm a liberal, and all the liberals think I'm conservative.
Anyway, you wrote: "Our state certainly needs to rid itself of corruption. If Stevens is convicted it will be a sad day. What he is charged with is so petty compared to the greater good he has done that will be a crying shame. And entirely his fault. He should of course take the blame for his actions. But that doesn't change the fact that it will hurt the state MORE if he is convicted... the damage comes from the hurt this does to the Republican party in Alaska."
I read you as follows:
Do I have that right?
If so, you are saying, in essence, that as long as he keeps the money [benefits, improvements, etc.] flowing, you are willing to overlook [forgive, sideline, ignore, etc.] lies and deception for the greater good of the Republican party [you]. Right?
$nice = $webHosting + $domainNames + $sslCerts
Uncle Ted may be going to Leavenworth, or some other Federal joint, but he's going to be held in the minimalist minimal security section, and will have unlimited visits and weekend trips home. No US senator (or Bush Administration member) will ever see the inside of a real jail cell. No matter what they've done.
Hell, the Vice President shot a guy in the face and told the sheriff who came to the door to come back tomorrow, and then had the luxury of almost a full day to clean up any potential evidence (or potential witness). Next time you get stopped for speeding, try giving the trooper your cell number and asking him to give you a call tomorrow, when you promise to take care of the matter. See where that gets you.
Ted Stevens' attorneys will say that their client is too old and feeble to do any time at all, even if Ted goes hunting every other weekend and bangs hookers and snorts meth daily. And the federal judge will talk about how losing his reelection bid will be "sufficient punishment" for this great man who has served his country for so long, blah blah blah.
Bottom line is that Senator Stevens will, like his brethren, jack off in the face of the Rule of Law.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Depending on the context, anything can be pork. If the point of legistlation is to provide more bike trails and fountains, me getting bike trails and fountains for my area probably is not pork, if the legistlation is a healthcare for the poor plan, those random fountains that somehow became a part of the plan are pork to the extreme.
Citation needed. Badly.
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
People use the series of tubes quote because it's a nice short quote that demonstrates his lack of knowledge about the internet. The whole damn speech that "series of tubes" is a part of is absolutely ridiculous. Look at the older posts in this discussion for better explanations of why the "series of tubes" thing is just a symptom of his ignorance. You are completely missing the point: This man has power over things he doesn't even understand. It's the same level of frustration you get when your manager explains the latest programming paradigm to you: you just want to rip his head off and get him to shut the fuck up so you can do your goddamn job.
Cynical Idealist
You have to be kidding me. US Senators might only be paid a base salary of 165K or so, but their ability to generate wealth far exceeds the ability of many corporate CEOs.
Quote from Forbes:
The point you missed is that their net worth was that high before they became Senators.
Advice: on VPS providers
If he ever serves a day in prison (unlikely), it will be in some minimum security prison where the only rape is to the taxpayers who have to pay the cable bill. Rich Republicans never pay for crimes they commit. Even when it looks like they might, they just find some slick way out of it (like Ken Lay, who killed himself so his wife and family could keep every dime of his stolen money).
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
Just because you've bought into the whole "cheap cynicism is cool" BS, doesn't mean you have to be so condescending to those of us who still recognize that sometimes the right people do the right things for the right reasons.
Maybe not often, but it happens.
Yeah because everyone know the US legal system HATES to lock up black men. Or is that just the "liberal media" spin on it? Or maybe it is because he hasn't yet been convicted of anything, and the investigation is still ongoing. Or do you think that as soon as someone is charged, they should go straight to jail without a trial? I mean, why would anyone ever be wrongly convicted of anything? If you haven't done anything wrong, you have nothing to fear!
"But this one goes to 11!"
Yes, almost by definition. "Pork Barrel" spending means federal spending for local projects to benefit the congressman's own constituents so they'll vote for him. In theory a congressman writing a law that gives funding for bike trails to the states or the national park service to spend as they see fit wouldn't be "pork barrel". IMO still not within the Federal government's mandate but not "Pork". But as is more usual an amendment submitted by a congressman to fund a particular bike path that happens to be in his district... well that IS pork barrel spending.
The problem is the really the first scenario though rather than the second. It's arguably the congressman's *job* to get that pork. They are called "representatives" for a reason, they represent the interests of their local community. The problem arises when we make everything a federal issue rather than a state or local one. There's no reason why the federal government should be spending one red cent on bike paths' (outside of localities under their direct control like military bases or DC). It's a purely local issue better dealt with by local governments and completely outside the scope of the powers given to the federal government. But when our view of the federal governments jurisdiction changed to be all encompassing and we now write laws like the first scenario where the federal government becomes in effect everyone's local government... well of course the congressmen will represent their communities (as arguably they should) to see that they get their share of that federal money (and a bit more if they have the pull.)
Here's an obnoxiously laid out page that shows many dollars a state received per dollar paid out in 2005. I'm sure you can find a red state/blue state map somewhere and do the comparison yourself.
http://www.taxfoundation.org/research/show/266.html
Actually, if you would compare that to the 2004 election and post red/blue totals, that would be great.
Actually, this is much better, and has an interesting map to boot. http://www.taxfoundation.org/files/sr139.pdf (PDF)
Fnord.
I may be a conservative, but after watching in disgust when he made his impassioned plea to save his Bridge to Nowhere from the Ax of Excess, and how he'd have to leave the Senate if that piece of governmental waste was cancelled, I was shouting at the TV: "DO IT! DO IT! PLEASE DO IT! GET HIM OUT OF THERE NOW!"
Unfortunately they bowed to his threat at the time.
If the Democrats were as hard on their elected politicians as I was on this one, we could have a much better Congress than we have now. Having someone as a member of your own party doesn't make them wonderful. Sometimes they're just embarassing.
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
Jimbo wasn't a user OR a dealer; a guy he went to high school with who had been dealing dope (everything from reefer to heroin to steroids) for twenty years got busted, so he let the feds tap his phone and he called up everybody he knew and tried to borrow money. Everyone who loaned him money went to prison.
That sounds unlikely. Are you relying on your friend's version of these events? I bet reality is nothing like what your friend is telling you.
Might well be because the cynicism is deserved rather than because it's "cool".
Just because some people are still naive enough to believe in Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, and Honest Politicians doesn't mean all of us should disable our critical thinking skills.
You're right, it did go to the towns airport.
Which was already adequately served by ferry service.
And the ferry service could have been expanded at a fraction of the cost of the bridge.
It was unnecessary pork that signified an enormous disrespect for the idea of spending tax dollars efficiently.
"Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
Do people in Idaho not pay those taxes also?
Does any of those taxes that those in Idaho also pay get funnelled into the state you live in?
Isn't spending money on real American citizens not actually a decent break from where a huge amount of the fed'gov's spending usually goes?
Can you really really see no reason why your taxes should go towards improving peoples lives? Are people who live their lives closer to you worth more of your tax dollars? Are your tax dollars different to people who live in further away states such that they must be divided and never mixed?
I agree that local governments should do what they can, just because it's going to be done more efficiently (smaller body = (reletively) less red tape etc) but fundamentally, where the amount being spent is equal, it hardly matters who does it, as long as you don't get one state funding development in another more than the reverse is also true, above the level of how much the one state needs help over the other.
The revolution will not be televised... but it will have a page on Wikipedia
You got it backwards. Stupid evil people slowly mess things up. They find small holes in the system that good people have set up. They widen them and abuse them. Then the smart good people notice. They quickly (quick as relative to the amount of time it takes for the problem to arise) fix the holes. Like with the American revolution, trust busting and the Magna Carta.
Mathematically speaking, political power is the ability to join winning coalitions.
The people are, then, very powerful indeed.
The goal then for private individuals and groups seeking power is to steer public opinion.
The problem is that people aren't, collectively, all that bright. At least they aren't good at paying attention, and the ones that do are often so partisan that even though they might do well on an IQ test. Go to a partisan web site for your side, and look at it objectively. Your political allies, left or right or libertarian, talk foolishly.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
Actually, the Vietnam War began during the Eisenhower administration, but thanks for playing anyway. As a parting gift, here is a link from Wikipedia.
I feel like death on a soda cracker.