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.
People like Ted Stevens don't go to pound-me-in-the-ass prison.
Some pigs are more equal than others.
"How did he stay in office so long if there was already evidence of corruption in 2003 and 2004?"
The same way Dan Rostenkowski did and Marion Barry and Murtha after Abscam:
"He may be a son-of-a-bitch, but he's OUR son-of-a-bitch"
Also keep in mind that he has brought home a lot of bacon to the residents of Alaska, and they probably view such minor corruption as a cross they just have to bear to get the goodies. Remember, the "bridge to nowhere" ALMOST got approved.
"As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
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.
How did he stay in office so long if there was already evidence of corruption in 2003 and 2004?
The same way that William Jefferson of New Orleans did (and still is).
(Who, BTW, in response to the AC that also responded to your post, is NOT white)
There is no "I disagree" mod for a reason. Flamebait, Troll, and Overrated are not substitutes.
Everyone hates congress...until election time when 95% of them get reelected.
What?
Term limits would solve that problem both by definition and by addressing a core problem - length of time served equals power in both houses. Then there's the problem that races tend to involve two absolutely shitty choices. Even with some pretty blatant gerrymandering, Utah republicans can't oust democrat Jim Matheson from congress because they keep nominating idiots to run against him.
The consequence of this system is that corruption never gets rooted out and a bunch of old men are deciding the future of a country that's changing very rapidly. I'll vote against incumbents when they give me a good alternative, and that doesn't happen too often.
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.
That pattern can be explained in a single word: gerrymandering.
Actually there is a bit more to it than that. Your own Congressman is probably pretty good at delivering "economic development" to his district. The other 434 assholes are just wasting our tax dollars on "pork".
Ever wonder why Congress as a whole gets shitty approval ratings yet people usually have good things to say about their own Rep?
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
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
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.