posted on April 21, 2004 12:43:39 AM new
I know in the US that if a major politician were under investigation on multiple counts of corruption every aspect of their life and every decision they made would be called into question. If that politician was in fact the president, people would be screaming for his head on a platter: demanding that he step down, bemoaning the dark cloud that would be placed over our country and every leader that aligned themselves with him.
That said - why are we supporting Sharon? This is a man that has two seperate ongoing investigations against him regarding corruption and could be forced to step down within the next few weeks and yet it garners almost zero attention from our press.
His son has been fighting for months to keep a tape of negotiations which it is alleged resulted in hundreds of thousands of dollars in bribes and when the battle is lost, claims that it was long ago erased because it "was no longer needed".
There is no way in hell that this nation would stand for such a thing from its leadership and yet me are pouring support and tax payers dollars behind this man.
Can someone please explain this logic?
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
If it's really "common" sense, why do so few people actually have it?
[ edited by fenix03 on Apr 21, 2004 12:45 AM ]
posted on April 21, 2004 09:12:31 AM new
Sharon doesn't yield the power an American president does.
Sharon is a majority coalition leader, and he can do nothing unless the members go along.
So no one gets too concerned about what he has been alleged to have done.
They know that even if Sharon is gone, unless the coalition should break, nothing has really changed.
If Sharon has done something criminal, they figure he'll get his due in time, but as for setting policies and goals for the country, he is not that important.
Sharon is more a messenger, he does not create the message.
posted on April 21, 2004 10:01:22 AM newSharon is a majority coalition leader, and he can do nothing unless the members go along.
And this is different from our president answering to the House and Senate in what way? Is it also OK that our President is corrupt since, well hell, he has to have approval of his actions anyway?
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
If it's really "common" sense, why do so few people actually have it?
