Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If they are not for sale then why does the PAC in the company I just retired from make such a big deal about getting contributions so that the company's "point of view" can be "heard" on the hill?
Is it possible that we, the voters, could maybe make any kind of change in that kind of activity? I say that sending them back to get that $175,000 salary from the tax payers is a bit stupid but do you know that about 10% of those people who say 70% have taken money think their congressmen wouldn't stoop that low?
I'd have to say that 70% of Congressmen/women ARE bought and paid for by corporations and their lobbyists. The voter doesn't have anyone representing THEM, corporate Amerika does.
Do you want to say that the unions don't own parts of many of them? You would be wrong if you say that. Look at the Porkulis bill from last year and see how much money the unions get. Look at what they get from the healthcare law. It is scary as hell. Look at the $26 billion bill they passed the other day to satisfy the unions of the teachers, policemen, and firemen. Yep, those unions have control of the members of Congress as well as the President.
What did you read? If you read what I wrote, you most certainly failed to comprehend it.
Nope. I said, I agreed with Bill Maher that Americans are stupid. The poll proves that. The problem with my post however is, that it probably went way over your head.
This is why I called 70% stupid, and the remaining 30% stupid as well. The first group is a bunch of self-defeaters, who even accepts that money runs politics but is largely opposed to doing something about it (in the end, they end up voting for a corporate sponsor, after all). The second group thinks it doesn't.
Now tell me, which of the two group is representative of a collective stupidity?
Which unions have profited at least as much as any corporation from the latest round of corrupt legislation?
And you credentials in the business of polling are what?
Does it chap you to see what Rasmussen says or do you just not like to see me talking about it? I didn't know we had to have any kind of credentials to talk about polls here. I guess you need to check in and tell me if I am wrong.
For those who failed to look up the poll results at Rasmussen her is a chance to learn what is going on by just clicking the video of Rasmussen reporting it as it is.
The Chamber of Commerce, just one organization, spent more money lobbying Congress than all of Congress made in Salary. If they are not for sale they are certainly for RENT
Of course they are for sale. Who's anyone kidding?
Watch the video of Rasmussen reporting on this subject and see that very many people think those people are for sale much cheaper than the salary they draw. If we remain as stupid as the Ghost says we are and keep sending those crooks back after we see them vote like they are owned by corporations and unions then the $175,000 salaries aren't high enough to make them stay honest. I think that if any of them thought there was a chance they wouldn't get re-elected they would be a bit more careful.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
New News about Rasmussen's poll
