See other Editorial Articles
Title: How the Federal Government Runs Business
Source:
email
URL Source: [None]
Published: Oct 12, 2008
Author: ?
Post Date: 2008-10-12 17:25:48 by James Deffenbach
Keywords: None
Views: 333
Comments: 16
I just got this in an email. I remembered it after I read it but hadn't thought about it in a long time. Back in 1990, the Government seized the Mustang Ranch brothel in Nevada for tax evasion and, as required by law, tried to run it. They failed and it closed. Now we are trusting the economy of our country to a pack of nit-wits who couldn't make money running a whore house and selling booze? Something to think about, isn't it? When they can sell two things that are always in pretty high demand and can't even make any money doing that, why should anyone trust them to "fix" the economy? Not to mention that government policies are what caused the problems in the first place.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: James Deffenbach (#0)
I think it would be much more accurate to say "How Big Business runs the Federal Government". Policies like NAFTA, GATT, CAFTA, the repeal of Glass-Steagall, extreme deregulation and other boondoggles did not exactly originate in the halls of Congress. It got so extreme that as of now paid lobbyists hired by multinational corporations actually write legislation and then have their bought and paid for politicians pass the bills as written. We've had thirty years now of "Government run like business", ever since day one of the "Reagan Revolution". Thank God the pendulum is finally swinging back to the idea of our government actually being run like... a government! You know, with citizens and stuff like that.
 | Gold and silver are REAL money, paper is but a promise. |
#2. To: Elliott Jackalope (#1)
Well, when you consider that the Federal Reserve is probably the biggest--and certainly by far the most profitable buisness (because it is based on theft)--you may have a point.
I think it would be much more accurate to say "How Big Business runs the Federal Government".
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end.
Lord Acton
#3. To: Elliott Jackalope (#1)
Yes. Owns and operates. Years ago when George Romney was head of HUD. I called and wangled my way into his personal secretary. I had a 15 minute conversation with her that spoke volumes. She was young and very polite but wanted to know how I had gotten into the inner office phone. She said there was no way I could speak with Romney. I asked if Romney were busy and her reply..."No, but he does not speak with just anybody". There was dead silence, then she said, "I am sorry, I should not have said that". We then had a personal and polite nobody to nobody conversation. She said if she put me thru to Romney she would be severely reprimanded if not fired. She asked what it was I wanted and told me that she would make a call to local HUD people as coming from Washington HUD. The next day I had what I wanted and local HUD were incensed that I had gone over their heads. Little did they know I was pushed away like everyone else, that are nobodies.
I think it would be much more accurate to say "How Big Business runs the Federal Government".
#4. To: Cynicom (#3)
Yep - a government of, by, and for the people. What a horrible joke it's become.
#5. To: James Deffenbach (#0)
Ali G In Da USAiii - Dick ThornburgTitle: How the Federal Government Runs Business
And they write innumerable books; being too vain and distracted for silence: seeking every one after his own elevation, and dodging his emptiness. - T. S. Eliot
#6. To: Flintlock (#5)
hung jury ping
And they write innumerable books; being too vain and distracted for silence: seeking every one after his own elevation, and dodging his emptiness. - T. S. Eliot
#7. To: Dakmar (#6)
European Leaders Agree to Inject Cash Into Banks "...the Bush administration has embarked on an overhaul of its own strategy. Two weeks after persuading the Congress to let it spend $700 billion to buy distressed securities tied to mortgages, the administration put that idea aside in favor of an approach that would have the government inject capital directly into the nation’s banks — in effect, partially nationalizing the industry."
www.nytimes.com/2008/10/1...ssnyt&emc=rss&oref=slogin
#8. To: All, dakmar (#7)
Look at the fella in the blue tie with red stripes. Isn't that a dead ringer for that weird actor guy?
#9. To: angle (#8)
to each his own (tie)
And they write innumerable books; being too vain and distracted for silence: seeking every one after his own elevation, and dodging his emptiness. - T. S. Eliot
#10. To: Dakmar (#5)
Man, that was off da hook! Thanks.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end.
Lord Acton
#11. To: James Deffenbach (#10)
when is it legal to murder someone? :)
And they write innumerable books; being too vain and distracted for silence: seeking every one after his own elevation, and dodging his emptiness. - T. S. Eliot
#12. To: Dakmar (#11)
Never. But that doesn't mean it is illegal to wetaweate as Mike Tyson said when he bit that guy's ear about half off. That was a funny video. I think Thornburg should have explained to him that while it was never legal to "murder" someone, he should have explained the concept of justifiable homicide and why it isn't illegal to kill someone who initiated conflict with you and appears to be intent on killing you. But I guess it would have made what was only supposed to be funny a bit too serious.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end.
Lord Acton
#13. To: James Deffenbach (#12)
Didn't Rudyard Kipling pen a piece about that?
But I guess it would have made what was only supposed to be funny a bit too serious.
And they write innumerable books; being too vain and distracted for silence: seeking every one after his own elevation, and dodging his emptiness. - T. S. Eliot
#14. To: Dakmar (#13)
Did he? I am not familiar with it.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end.
Lord Acton
#15. To: James Deffenbach (#14) (Edited)
And they write innumerable books; being too vain and distracted for silence: seeking every one after his own elevation, and dodging his emptiness. - T. S. Eliot
#16. To: Dakmar (#9)
Rowan Atkinson
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest