I agree wholeheartedly that big picture policy corruption vs. personal sexual/tax pecadillos is a false moral dichotomy in politics. It has been painstakingly crafted over the last 35 years part and parcel of (IMHO) of the hypocritical faux "culture wars". It has been one of true epic triumphs of "conservative" political misdirection (though some liberals like to make the marionette dance as well when it suits them).

Truth be told America is far from "exceptional" in any way other than ability to consume. Rather it's an incredibly weird violent anti-reason based culture that abhors self-reflection, consistent morality, and anyone or anything that challenges its petulant whims. A failing empire in every sense of the imagination. Then again England still exists, and though far from perfect, it certainly didn't perish after its pursuit of empire collapsed.

Maybe America's decline/destruction is impossible to prevent given that human beings are fallible imperfect creatures particularly those humans who seek power and wealth as an end in itself. The political and economic systems and structures they create are necessarily hollow vessels because their ends are morally vapid and devoid of creativity predicated on the false notion that there are classes of superior and inferior rather than a spectrum of humans each potentially contributing something important based on ability. But the "modern" feudal empire pursuing types clearly don't want to build a better societal mousetrap, they just learned how to advertise and propogandize more effectively to maintain the old ways while convincing people they were giving them something new.

There clearly was an elitist vs. little people dichotomy/tension enshrined in our Constitution and in the minds of the players that created it. Doesn't mean they desired to build anything the expected to last beyond their lifetimes despite the lofty rhetoric.

Jefferson seemed to understand that if the "system" they created was going to last it would have to be subject to significant changes every generation. We are basically powerless to do that absent mass social movements and people are too busy just trying to put food on the table under the current system. That's why IMHO we need to create "better citizens" in this country before we're able to change the systems. The masses need to be able to reason consistently and be able to identify their collective long term interests and then organize and act to achieve that. Otherwise they're just used as pawns pitted against each other to maintain the status quo for elite forces in society. Howard Zinn is my favorite historian on that little nugget of truth surely well known to followers of UT.

yeah that's about all we've got on others anymore--our global surveillance capability, extortion, and fear. Once people stop fearing us or we go broke, the game is up.

Peter Byrne writes,

You appear to be unfamiliar with the military construction appropriation process. Otherwise you would know that “task orders” on existing open-ended IDIQ contracts are often submitted to MILCON by the DOD on 1391 forms. If you do not know how to access those forms online, despite your career as an investigative journalist (now cut short, in my humble opinion, by your going to work for a non-profit lobby group, the Sunshine Foundation, which is funded by an Iraq war contractor with close business and personal ties to Feinstein and her husband, Richard Blum), I will be glad to give you a lesson in how to search public records.

Byrne questioning Allison, calling bullshit on Allison's work for Sunshine Foundation [sic] funded by an "Iraq war contractor" with business and personal ties to Feinstein and Blum. What is the real relationship between this unidentified "war contractor" and Feinstein/Blum?

What's the story here--is Allison a paid shill or is Byrne a bad researcher. Which is more relevant to the credibility of the Sunlight Foundation as sufficiently independent to "dispel inaccuracies" regarding Feinstein's positions and Blum's contract awards.

Just because Feinstein poses a question at a congressional budget hearing taking exception with a budget request is irrelevant. Generally the end result or downstream actions are those that are relevant. Did contracts that she had a say in awarding or approving get awarded to her husband directly or to an entity associated with him?

That's what should be strictly prohibited in America. A person holding public office should never be able allowed to engage in activities that have even the appearance of cronyism or worse wield any control whatsoever over helping friends or family belly up to the public trough. It's bad enough when they pull a Mr. and Mrs. Daschle by engaging in post service lobbying for themselves and paying clients. It should be totally banned. Run for office get elected, serve, retire, and then get into another line of work. Anything less is generally demonstrable insider cronyistic bullshit.