Who is more corrupt, Governor Blagojevich or Senator Shelby?

[hedgehog]

If the charges against him are accurate, Governor Blagojevich has used his office to attempt to line his pocket, promising to award an Illinois Senate seat to the highest bidder.

Senator Shelby, on the other hand, is merely doing his darnedest to put the Big 3 Automakers out of business permanently, thereby breaking the UAW and decreasing competition for foreign owned companies that happen to build cars in non-union plants in his state. Forget about the domino effect on the rest of the US economy at this fragile time. As long as Shelby and his supporters triumph, that's all that matters.

So, who is more corrupt?

[Raven]

1. It would have been nice if you had given us another choice: BOTH. n/t

[hedgehog]

3. Assuming the Governor is actually guilty, they are indeed both corrupt.

My OP was meant to point out that while what Senator Shelby is doing may be legal, in the end his corruption will cause far more serious damge to the entire country.

[NNN0LHI]

2. That one was easy

[ronmm]

4. Corruption?

You certainly have a very odd definition of the word corrupt...

A senator that is looking out for their constituents doesn't seem corrupt to me. The senators of the states where the Big 3 (or companies that supply them) operate are certainly going to support the bailout. A senator not from those states might have less reason, in fact might be under pressure from their constituents to not waste their tax dollars on the bailout.

A senator that doesn't feel the government and the people have to bail out companies that are failing because of poor management doesn't seem corrupt to me. If my own small company is near bankruptcy, I know that the government is not going to bail me out, no matter how many people in my town might depend on my services.

Whether or not the nation will collapse without a bailout is debatable. Sure a lot of jobs could be lost, but a lot of jobs are already being lost. Join the line.

Whether their collapse is due to the current economic situation is also debatable. If they had been better managed, and had a better line up of cars and had a better reputation for good reliable cars, and had prepared for a rainy day by saving up cash and so on, they'd be able to whether out a slow down in car purchases. Ford arguably has been better managed as of late and is the one least needy of a bailout. Perhaps the US does not need 3 big car companies. Do we need that many cars? Let one fail and let the others scale back.

Anyway, whatever you believe about the current auto situation, claiming that senators who don't support it are more corrupt then a governor that takes bribes is really quite an exaggeration. It's not something I'd expect to see on a progressive democratic message board. We can't blindly support them just because they are heavily unionized. Don't forget that the foreign auto makers are suffering too.