DO YOU THINK POLITICIANS SHOULD BE HELD TO THE SAME STANDARDS WE ARE?

user ballots

political :

DO YOU THINK POLITICIANS SHOULD BE HELD TO THE SAME STANDARDS WE ARE?


[+] serious ballot by herzog
created Sun Jun 18, 06

A grand jury declined to indict Rep. Cynthia McKinney on Friday in connection with a confrontation in which she admitted hitting a police officer who tried to stop her from entering a House office building.

The grand jury had been considering the case since shortly after the March 29 incident, which has led to much discussion on Capitol Hill about race and the conduct of lawmakers and the officers who protect them.

- - - - - - - -

Now, I don't know about you, but I've pretty sure that if I were to take a swing at a cop I'd get some sort of penalty (certainly more than being let go, 100% scot-free).

Does this seem right to you? Not just this case, but for instance whenever a kennedy tries top kill someone in an alcohol/drug induced stupor the cops always seem to show up to drive them home, then let them off without charges.

Should politicians face the same penalties for these sorts of crimes that we common folk would?

Yes, they should be held to the same standard that we are
No, they should be held to a higher standard and punished more severely
No, they shouldn't, they have an important job and need to blow off some steam every now and then
I get to punch cops all the time and never face any penalty, but I am a politician
Only liberal democrats should be held to a higher standard. Not conservative Republicans


Ballot #95986 : SEE RESULTS

Comment:

show your vote with comment?

v 1.5 © BESTANDWORST.COM
smile bank:









similiar ballots:
84821. Should all politicians be held to the same standard?
71146. Should the USA comply with international law and standards?
84874. Do you hold your God to any ethical standards at all?
114627. I think many women help the double standards
35286. Do other animals live by communist standards?
86686. QUIZ: GOP consistency regarding surveillance standards
114052. Best and Worst's Hypocrits and Double Standards?
114481. Iraq: Why Is There No Benchmarks, Receipts, Standards, Guidelines Or ...
91302. Do you think the new fuel economy standards will make an appreciable impact?
118445. Growing Middle-Class and Rising Living Standards in Brazil. Captialism?


COMMENTS:
But they aren't.
by oh_what_a_relief on Sun Jun 18, 06 9:24am [+]

They are merely civil servants and should be role models in all respects of the law!
by MO_ on Sun Jun 18, 06 9:36am [+]

Yes, they should and it pisses me off that they are not held to the same standard.
by FiddleFaddleOnLSD on Sun Jun 18, 06 12:42pm [+]

It's funny. I don't remember this ballotmaker doing several ballots about the 2.5 million in bribes that Rebublican Congressman Randy "Duke" Cunningham took. But I'm sure that's just a coincidence.

MAG_afro
by cranky on Sun Jun 18, 06 1:09pm [+]

Wouldn't it be nice?

Once more, I render full apologies on behalf of myself and anyone else who inflicted that woman on Washington and the world at large.
by Truthseeker013 on Sun Jun 18, 06 1:14pm [+]

Actually, I think EVERYONE should be given a fair hearing and treated equally under the law, irregardless of their race, colour, creed, sex and above all HOW MUCH MONEY THEY HAVE!!!
by Steelhamster on Sun Jun 18, 06 1:18pm [+]

Also from the same article, which was cut-and-pasted from the ABC website:

"Wainstein, meanwhile, sought an indictment from a federal grand jury, with assault on a police officer mentioned in the filings as a possible charge. That is a felony that would require an indictment."

"The grand jury then subpoenaed several House aides thought to have witnessed the encounter. McKenna, too, testified. The grand jury voted not to indict her. Prosecutors also could have charged McKinney with simple assault without having to seek an indictment."

Two important points here: One is that the presumption underlying this ballot is that the grand jury was affected by McKinney's status as a black, female politician, and that's just plain stupid (and probably racist), Nonsense. Obviously, the grand jury heard the case, saw numerous witnesses and then decided there wasn't enough evidence to press a federal charge.

The second point is that Wainstein could have simply pressed a misdemeanor charge of assault, and probably could have gotten a conviction. But Wainstein got greedy and went for the federal charge, instead. The grand jury decided he was over-reaching. What we have here is most likely prosecutorial incompetence.

The feds blew this case. The neo-con argument that anytime a black female gets off, it must be reverse racism is racist in itself.

Not that Duke is a racist, of course.

MAG_afro
by cranky on Sun Jun 18, 06 1:24pm [+]

'Actually, I think EVERYONE should be given a fair hearing and treated equally under the law, irregardless of their race, colour, creed, sex and above all HOW MUCH MONEY THEY HAVE!!!'


So why'd you vote for that asinine choice?
by herzog on Sun Jun 18, 06 2:05pm [+]

Yes, by crikey. Although I'm not sure if our already over-stuffed prisons could accommodate them all?
by xxxxxxxx on Sun Jun 18, 06 2:31pm [+]

It was an attempt at humour on my part Herzog.

It isn't always necesarry to take oneself seriously
by Steelhamster on Sun Jun 18, 06 5:07pm [+]

Funny, too, how the subject of Dick Cheney's drunken gun-rampage wasn't mentioned in the narrative of the ballot. But I guess that was okay. He's a rich Republican.

MAG_afro
by cranky on Sun Jun 18, 06 5:33pm [+]

Oh, and, cranky, to quote/paraphrase the judgement in a different case: "She's too pretty to be indicted." Maybe that applies in this assault case!


by xxxxxxxx on Mon Jun 19, 06 3:14am [+]

Not saying anyone is a racist.


* whistles *

by xxxxxxxx on Mon Jun 19, 06 3:16am [+]






About Us | Join Us | Privacy Policy | Contact
© 2002-2008 BestAndWorst.com All Rights Reserved