federal shame

Okay, so while I was out looking for some new corruption news to blog about, I stumbled across an article written by two students from Dartmouth.  I thought that this article may have an analysis of some kind of political corruption in america, and it did, just in a very confusing way.  The article tried to assert the following: "state governments are particularly vulnerable to public corruption by comparison with local governments or the wealthier Federal government. The Federal government has higher levels of administrativeprofessionalism; Washington draws both the best and brightest of administrators alongside more professional and reelection-minded politicians who are more mindful of the consequences of their and

others’ misdeeds. Further, there is putatively greater review and monitoring of subordinates’ actions by

Washington’s leaders."(3)  So the federal government is less inclined to have corrupt officials, I personally tend to disagree, and my first witness will be former president Richard Nixon, over here on my right.  

Presiden Nixon was involved in the watergate scandal, a botched attempt to place listening devices inside the democratic party's headquarters at the watergate hotel complex.  Afterwards, Nixon tried to cover everything up, but the truth slowly leaked out, and Nixon resigned one day before his impeachement. 

So, to you bright young dartmouth students who say that Washington D.C. is less likely to be corrupt than say the New York senate up in Albany, I point out the fact that only a few short decades ago, the single most powerful man in the world, and the head of Washington, became the first president to resign from office because he was corrupted by the belief that the president is above the law.