Political Crossfire Forums

[poweRob]

Senators Request Investigation into Whether Corporations are Restricting Access to Biofuels

Ruh Ro Raggy!

I wonder if this investigation will get any traction and actually happen. It'd sure be interesting to see if there is any of these alleged shenanigans going on.

[Politic]

Rob wrote: Senators Request Investigation into Whether Corporations are Restricting Access to Biofuels

Ruh Ro Raggy!

I wonder if this investigation will get any traction and actually happen. It'd sure be interesting to see if there is any of these alleged shenanigans going on.
I doubt it. Not at this time anyway. These people are too big and powerful.

[John Galt]

What shenannigans could possibly be going on? If they don't want to sell it, or anyone affiliated with their product to sell bio-fuels... they don't have to.

[Politic]

John Galt wrote: What shenannigans could possibly be going on? If they don't want to sell it, or anyone affiliated with their product to sell bio-fuels... they don't have to.
Well, lets see here... Overpriceing, pollution but they dont care because they are making hundreds of billions of dollars in net profit and getting tax breaks during a time of war and when our nation has poor health care. Some people think the entire war in the middle east is because of oil. What are you blind? :lol: j/k All of that can be avoided, lives saved, money saved, more efficiency if we used cleaner fuels. When a product or company or anything effects the entire country or world it needs to be regulated/controlled by the government. Its not your average everyday corporations.

Another reason they would hold back technology is because they have big plans for the middle east and have already invested hundreds of billions of dollars of tax payer money to prepare for the massive suckage of oil out of the middle east. When all is said and done do you think the money will go back to the tax payer or government in anyway? Or do you think it will go into the pockets of the Oil Corporations so they can scheme and screw everything else up even worse for another hundred billion dollars?

[John Galt]

Politic wrote: John Galt wrote: What shenannigans could possibly be going on? If they don't want to sell it, or anyone affiliated with their product to sell bio-fuels... they don't have to.
Well, lets see here... Overpriceing, pollution but they dont care because they are making hundreds of billions of dollars in net profit and getting tax breaks during a time of war and when our nation has poor health care. Some people think the entire war in the middle east is because of oil. What are you blind? :lol: j/k All of that can be avoided, lives saved, money saved, more efficiency if we used cleaner fuels. When a product or company or anything effects the entire country or world it needs to be regulated/controlled by the government. Its not your average everyday corporations.

Another reason they would hold back technology is because they have big plans for the middle east and have already invested hundreds of billions of dollars of tax payer money to prepare for the massive suckage of oil out of the middle east. When all is said and done do you think the money will go back to the tax payer or government in anyway? Or do you think it will go into the pockets of the Oil Corporations so they can scheme and screw everything else up even worse for another hundred billion dollars?

None of that addressesthe question as towhat shennanigans could possibly be going on here. Sowhat if they make profit? So what if they supply a product that is in high demand? I almost wishthat war in the Middle East was for oil so at least we'd get something out of it. A year ago it was for oil so "Americans can have cheap oil." Now the mantra is "so corporations have their profits." Whatever, none of it is based on reality.

Inany event, we are talking about oil companies refusing to sell bio-fuels. I don't think that that is wrong in any way. Other people can sell them if they wish. Not like they get good gas milegage anyway.

[cap'n queasy]

John Galt wrote: What shenannigans could possibly be going on? If they don't want to sell it, or anyone affiliated with their product to sell bio-fuels... they don't have to.

This is true. But they also do things like buy patents and bury them. This is legal, I suppose, but runs counter to the idea that technology will always advance fastest in an environment of intellectual and financial freedom.

I consider actions like this highly unethical.

[John Galt]

cap'n queasy wrote: John Galt wrote: What shenannigans could possibly be going on? If they don't want to sell it, or anyone affiliated with their product to sell bio-fuels... they don't have to.

This is true. But they also do things like buy patents and bury them. This is legal, I suppose, but runs counter to the idea that technology will always advance fastest in an environment of intellectual and financial freedom.

I consider actions like this highly unethical.

What patents? I heard that in a Steven Segal movie once. So it's unethical to not sellyour competitors product?

I'd sell it for 5 a gallon.

[poweRob]

John Galt wrote: What shenannigans could possibly be going on? If they don't want to sell it, or anyone affiliated with their product to sell bio-fuels... they don't have to.

These kinds of shenanigans...

Quote: The major answer to this question is the long-standing opposition of The Highway Lobby -- the auto, oil, tire and cement industries. You don't hear much these days about "The Highway Lobby" as such. The reason is that it has done its destructive job which is to make America an occasion for ribbons of crowded highways carrying millions of motor vehicles as the only "practical and direct" way to get around on the ground.

At times the lobby has to resort to crime to achieve its assaults on public transit, while at other periods, it just used its money, muscle and propaganda with state and Washington lawmakers. Twenty eight crimes were committed by General Motors and its oil and tire company co-conspirators in the Thirties and Forties leading to their convictions in federal district court in Chicago during the late Forties. The U.S. Justice Department's charge, upheld in court, was that these large companies, in order to eliminate their major rivals -- the trolley industry -- bought up these firms, tore up the tracks in and around 28 major cities in the U.S., including the biggest one in Los Angeles, and lobbied legislators to build more and more highways to sell more and more vehicles, gasoline and tires. Earlier, GM tried to pressure banks to reduce credit to these trolley companies and when that did not succeed sufficiently, the conspiracy to buy out their competitors and shut them down was hatched.

This is more than corporate crime history. Everyday, today, tomorrow and the next day, millions of Americans find themselves on clogged, bumper to bumper commutes because there is no convenient mass transit or no mass transit at all where they live and work.

linkypoo...

You are a free market lover John. How come you have little to no critisism of interference in free market competition when it comes from the corporations or from the side of corporate/government co'ops?

Next thing you know big oil will pull a William Randolph Hearst maneauver to spread false propoganda and lobby government to make bio-fuels illegal using scare tactics like making a movie called "Bio-fuel madness" where mindless users of biofuels chop up their families with an axe after the bio-fumes got to their head.

[John Galt]

Rob wrote: John Galt wrote: What shenannigans could possibly be going on? If they don't want to sell it, or anyone affiliated with their product to sell bio-fuels... they don't have to.

These kinds of shenanigans...

Quote: The major answer to this question is the long-standing opposition of The Highway Lobby -- the auto, oil, tire and cement industries. You don't hear much these days about "The Highway Lobby" as such. The reason is that it has done its destructive job which is to make America an occasion for ribbons of crowded highways carrying millions of motor vehicles as the only "practical and direct" way to get around on the ground.

At times the lobby has to resort to crime to achieve its assaults on public transit, while at other periods, it just used its money, muscle and propaganda with state and Washington lawmakers. Twenty eight crimes were committed by General Motors and its oil and tire company co-conspirators in the Thirties and Forties leading to their convictions in federal district court in Chicago during the late Forties. The U.S. Justice Department's charge, upheld in court, was that these large companies, in order to eliminate their major rivals -- the trolley industry -- bought up these firms, tore up the tracks in and around 28 major cities in the U.S., including the biggest one in Los Angeles, and lobbied legislators to build more and more highways to sell more and more vehicles, gasoline and tires. Earlier, GM tried to pressure banks to reduce credit to these trolley companies and when that did not succeed sufficiently, the conspiracy to buy out their competitors and shut them down was hatched.

This is more than corporate crime history. Everyday, today, tomorrow and the next day, millions of Americans find themselves on clogged, bumper to bumper commutes because there is no convenient mass transit or no mass transit at all where they live and work.

linkypoo...

You are a free market lover John. How come you have little to no critisism of interference in free market competition when it comes from the corporations or from the side of corporate/government co'ops?

Next thing you know big oil will pull a William Randolph Hearst maneauver to spread false propoganda and lobby government to make bio-fuels illegal using scare tactics like making a movie called "Bio-fuel madness" where mindless users of biofuels chop up their families with an axe after the bio-fumes got to their head.

Well, I would disagree with public transportation in general anyway.

Corrpution in American politics is not as glamorous as it is elsewhere. In America it's all about infrastructure. Roads, highways, light rail transit systems, bus transit systems, AMTRAK, doesn't matter. The politicans are sacrificing whatever principles they might have for more power, as the squeaky wheel always gets the oil and in this instance people upset about commutes or gas prices or whatever are going to be exponentially louder than "taxpayers" (who include those same commuters ironically enough) who are hard to organize and are becoming a minority (in the next few decades more people will be RECIEVING government funds than CONTRIBUTING making the idea of tax cuts a loosing campaign issue). It's not the rent-seeking buisnesses that are to blame, it is the politicans who cater to them, and in the process betray our Constitution. It's also the American people who are to blame to allow this to happen. Buisnesses are not bound by the Constitution Rob, but our government is supposed to be. Business should be able to waste whatever money they want trying to buy off politicans. It's still the politican's fault.

But the thing is Rob, I thought we were talking about biofuel shennanigans.

You might be happy to note that I tried some out. At a nearby gas station one pump had, for awful cheap (comparitivley speaking), this ethanol gasoline. But me, being a tight wad and very selfish man, keeps scrupulous notes regarding the time, place, cost, amount of product, and milegage on my vehicle whenever I fill up, change my (own) oil, filters, etc., etc. And what happened? At current prices the gas milegage for my vehicle is better with conventional fuel. Now this MAY change if Bush starts nuking Iran or something, but as it stands it is cheaper for me (I say nothing about other people's vehicles but I would wager they'd have similar experiences as I do) to use conventional fuels, which I also KNOW will not screw up my car. I don't know that about biofuels (I'd bet not, but since it's cheaper to not risk it anyway...).

[cap'n queasy]

John Galt wrote: cap'n queasy wrote: John Galt wrote: What shenannigans could possibly be going on? If they don't want to sell it, or anyone affiliated with their product to sell bio-fuels... they don't have to.

This is true. But they also do things like buy patents and bury them. This is legal, I suppose, but runs counter to the idea that technology will always advance fastest in an environment of intellectual and financial freedom.

I consider actions like this highly unethical.

What patents? I heard that in a Steven Segal movie once. So it's unethical to not sellyour competitors product?

I'd sell it for 5 a gallon.

Patents for more efficient engine parts. etc. This has nothing to do with with selling their competitors products. It has to do with doing away with technology that is more fuel efficient.

This is not market freedom, it is an abuse of intellectual property to sell more oil.

[poweRob]

You won't find me promoting ethanol because of its mileage inefficiencies. Bio-diesel is another thing altogether.

I have to fully disagree with you here:

Quote: Business should be able to waste whatever money they want trying to buy off politicans. It's still the politican's fault.

IMO...when a political bribe happens, it is treason on behalf of the briber in attempts to disrupt constituent representation with a bribe and treasonist of a politician to accept and make good that bribe.

While I'm disgusted with the politicians to no end about this, I hold the aggresssor of the situation, the one proposing the bribe, as being more guilty by the mere fact that they instigated and by not only getting the ball rolling but creating the ball in the first place.

Anyway you cut it, they are stealing or attempting to steal constituent representation which is treasonist IMO.

My opinion can't be swayed on this by saying that businesses are people too because they are already represented privately as a citizen. Stepping into the fray with dollars in hand under the banner of a corp. is looking to buy more representation and often from congressmen and senators whose districts and states they do not live in.

That is an aggregious governmental manipulation IMO because they aren't only trying to seek a bigger hold on representation by their congressman, they are crossing borders and trying to usurp the representation that never belonged to them in the first place.

[John Galt]

cap'n queasy wrote: John Galt wrote: cap'n queasy wrote: John Galt wrote: What shenannigans could possibly be going on? If they don't want to sell it, or anyone affiliated with their product to sell bio-fuels... they don't have to.

This is true. But they also do things like buy patents and bury them. This is legal, I suppose, but runs counter to the idea that technology will always advance fastest in an environment of intellectual and financial freedom.

I consider actions like this highly unethical.

What patents? I heard that in a Steven Segal movie once. So it's unethical to not sellyour competitors product?

I'd sell it for 5 a gallon.

Patents for more efficient engine parts. etc. This has nothing to do with with selling their competitors products. It has to do with doing away with technology that is more fuel efficient.

No, what patent numbers? This is public information.

Quote: This is not market freedom, it is an abuse of intellectual property to sell more oil.

Their perogative, just as it is John Galt's peroggative to shrug and let everyone else die because he does not want his intellectual property stolen for some "good" that he does not believe in.

[cap'n queasy]

Quote: Their perogative, just as it is John Galt's peroggative to shrug and let everyone else die because he does not want his intellectual property stolen for some "good" that he does not believe in.

:lol:

[poweRob]

Quote: Their perogative, just as it is John Galt's peroggative to shrug and let everyone else die because he does not want his intellectual property stolen for some "good" that he does not believe in.

Good Lord!

If it helps your yankee ego, I'll put "The" in front of your name each time I refer to you.

[John Galt]

Rob wrote: You won't find me promoting ethanol because of its mileage inefficiencies. Bio-diesel is another thing altogether.

Ahh. Well OK. But still, where is the shennanigans in regards to restricting biofuels?

Quote: I have to fully disagree with you here:

Quote: Business should be able to waste whatever money they want trying to buy off politicans. It's still the politican's fault.

IMO...when a political bribe happens, it is treason on behalf of the briber in attempts to disrupt constituent representation with a bribe and treasonist of a politician to accept and make good that bribe.

While I'm disgusted with the politicians to no end about this, I hold the aggresssor of the situation, the one proposing the bribe, as being more guilty by the mere fact that they instigated and by not only getting the ball rolling but creating the ball in the first place.

Anyway you cut it, they are stealing or attempting to steal constituent representation which is treasonist IMO.

My opinion can't be swayed on this by saying that businesses are people too because they are already represented privately as a citizen. Stepping into the fray with dollars in hand under the banner of a corp. is looking to buy more representation and often from congressmen and senators whose districts and states they do not live in.

That is an aggregious governmental manipulation IMO because they aren't only trying to seek a bigger hold on representation by their congressman, they are crossing borders and trying to usurp the representation that never belonged to them in the first place.

Well you'll have to disagree then. I place blame on the person who does the treason, or who dirties the Constitution, not the person who offers money to do it. I don't blame Russia for Alger Hiss. I blame Alger Hiss for Alger Hiss.

Before you start talking about hit men I will stop you. The rent-seeking buisnesses are looking out for their bestintrests, not the best intrests of the Constitution. They don't care about the Constitution and frankly, it really shouldn't matter to them. This is just another buisness transaction because if you remove the Constitution from the matter they really are not doing anything wrong. So who does the Constitution apply to? The government and those people in it. Not buisnesses, the government. Again, I blame Alger Hiss for Alger Hiss.

[poweRob]

John Galt wrote: Rob wrote: You won't find me promoting ethanol because of its mileage inefficiencies. Bio-diesel is another thing altogether.

Ahh. Well OK. But still, where is the shennanigans in regards to restricting biofuels?

Quote: I have to fully disagree with you here:

Quote: Business should be able to waste whatever money they want trying to buy off politicans. It's still the politican's fault.

IMO...when a political bribe happens, it is treason on behalf of the briber in attempts to disrupt constituent representation with a bribe and treasonist of a politician to accept and make good that bribe.

While I'm disgusted with the politicians to no end about this, I hold the aggresssor of the situation, the one proposing the bribe, as being more guilty by the mere fact that they instigated and by not only getting the ball rolling but creating the ball in the first place.

Anyway you cut it, they are stealing or attempting to steal constituent representation which is treasonist IMO.

My opinion can't be swayed on this by saying that businesses are people too because they are already represented privately as a citizen. Stepping into the fray with dollars in hand under the banner of a corp. is looking to buy more representation and often from congressmen and senators whose districts and states they do not live in.

That is an aggregious governmental manipulation IMO because they aren't only trying to seek a bigger hold on representation by their congressman, they are crossing borders and trying to usurp the representation that never belonged to them in the first place.

Well you'll have to disagree then. I place blame on the person who does the treason, or who dirties the Constitution, not the person who offers money to do it. I don't blame Russia for Alger Hiss. I blame Alger Hiss for Alger Hiss.

Before you start talking about hit men I will stop you. The rent-seeking buisnesses are looking out for their bestintrests, not the best intrests of the Constitution. They don't care about the Constitution and frankly, it really shouldn't matter to them. This is just another buisness transaction because if you remove the Constitution from the matter they really are not doing anything wrong. So who does the Constitution apply to? The government and those people in it. Not buisnesses, the government. Again, I blame Alger Hiss for Alger Hiss.

Come on John! That's a horrible comparison. As an individual, if you try to bribe a police officer, you are breaking the law and should be arrested right?

If you agree that bribing a police officer is and should be illegal and result in your arrest, then you have a gapping hole in your ideology that you need to explain why you give freebie law-breaking rights to corps but not individuals. Surely if you are an individual bribing a cop, you are doing it for you best interest in mind.

Second, how can you argue "if you remove the Constitution from the matter they really are not doing anything wrong" when the whole basis of the argument is the subversion of constitutional representation in the first place? It's a completely ridiculous stance to take.

Of course if there are no laws, then there are no laws broken. You are the one who says we are a nation of laws. Now you are arguing that with your ideology in place, corps. are exempt from the laws in a nation of laws?

[John Galt]

Rob wrote: John Galt wrote: Rob wrote: You won't find me promoting ethanol because of its mileage inefficiencies. Bio-diesel is another thing altogether.

Ahh. Well OK. But still, where is the shennanigans in regards to restricting biofuels?

Quote: I have to fully disagree with you here:

Quote: Business should be able to waste whatever money they want trying to buy off politicans. It's still the politican's fault.

IMO...when a political bribe happens, it is treason on behalf of the briber in attempts to disrupt constituent representation with a bribe and treasonist of a politician to accept and make good that bribe.

While I'm disgusted with the politicians to no end about this, I hold the aggresssor of the situation, the one proposing the bribe, as being more guilty by the mere fact that they instigated and by not only getting the ball rolling but creating the ball in the first place.

Anyway you cut it, they are stealing or attempting to steal constituent representation which is treasonist IMO.

My opinion can't be swayed on this by saying that businesses are people too because they are already represented privately as a citizen. Stepping into the fray with dollars in hand under the banner of a corp. is looking to buy more representation and often from congressmen and senators whose districts and states they do not live in.

That is an aggregious governmental manipulation IMO because they aren't only trying to seek a bigger hold on representation by their congressman, they are crossing borders and trying to usurp the representation that never belonged to them in the first place.

Well you'll have to disagree then. I place blame on the person who does the treason, or who dirties the Constitution, not the person who offers money to do it. I don't blame Russia for Alger Hiss. I blame Alger Hiss for Alger Hiss.

Before you start talking about hit men I will stop you. The rent-seeking buisnesses are looking out for their bestintrests, not the best intrests of the Constitution. They don't care about the Constitution and frankly, it really shouldn't matter to them. This is just another buisness transaction because if you remove the Constitution from the matter they really are not doing anything wrong. So who does the Constitution apply to? The government and those people in it. Not buisnesses, the government. Again, I blame Alger Hiss for Alger Hiss.

Come on John! That's a horrible comparison. As an individual, if you try to bribe a police officer, you are breaking the law and should be arrested right?

If you agree that bribing a police officer is and should be illegal and result in your arrest, then you have a gapping hole in your ideology that you need to explain why you give freebie law-breaking rights to corps but not individuals. Surely if you are an individual bribing a cop, you are doing it for you best interest in mind.

Second, how can you argue "if you remove the Constitution from the matter they really are not doing anything wrong" when the whole basis of the argument is the subversion of constitutional representation in the first place? It's a completely ridiculous stance to take.

Of course if there are no laws, then there are no laws broken. You are the one who says we are a nation of laws. Now you are arguing that with your ideology in place, corps. are exempt from the laws in a nation of laws?

There are laws, but just as a law on Mining regulations do not apply to potato farmers, the law regarding the structure of the federal government and the rights that must not be infringed upon by said government do not apply to corporations. Again, it is the person who is bribed's fault, as he is the person who should be respecting the Contitution in regards to the power of the federal government, not the corporation or buisness or private person who bribed. Amazingly enough, people can not accept bribes.

[Achilles The Myrmidon]

John Galt wrote: Rob wrote: John Galt wrote: Rob wrote: You won't find me promoting ethanol because of its mileage inefficiencies. Bio-diesel is another thing altogether.

Ahh. Well OK. But still, where is the shennanigans in regards to restricting biofuels?

Quote: I have to fully disagree with you here:

Quote: Business should be able to waste whatever money they want trying to buy off politicans. It's still the politican's fault.

IMO...when a political bribe happens, it is treason on behalf of the briber in attempts to disrupt constituent representation with a bribe and treasonist of a politician to accept and make good that bribe.

While I'm disgusted with the politicians to no end about this, I hold the aggresssor of the situation, the one proposing the bribe, as being more guilty by the mere fact that they instigated and by not only getting the ball rolling but creating the ball in the first place.

Anyway you cut it, they are stealing or attempting to steal constituent representation which is treasonist IMO.

My opinion can't be swayed on this by saying that businesses are people too because they are already represented privately as a citizen. Stepping into the fray with dollars in hand under the banner of a corp. is looking to buy more representation and often from congressmen and senators whose districts and states they do not live in.

That is an aggregious governmental manipulation IMO because they aren't only trying to seek a bigger hold on representation by their congressman, they are crossing borders and trying to usurp the representation that never belonged to them in the first place.

Well you'll have to disagree then. I place blame on the person who does the treason, or who dirties the Constitution, not the person who offers money to do it. I don't blame Russia for Alger Hiss. I blame Alger Hiss for Alger Hiss.

Before you start talking about hit men I will stop you. The rent-seeking buisnesses are looking out for their bestintrests, not the best intrests of the Constitution. They don't care about the Constitution and frankly, it really shouldn't matter to them. This is just another buisness transaction because if you remove the Constitution from the matter they really are not doing anything wrong. So who does the Constitution apply to? The government and those people in it. Not buisnesses, the government. Again, I blame Alger Hiss for Alger Hiss.

Come on John! That's a horrible comparison. As an individual, if you try to bribe a police officer, you are breaking the law and should be arrested right?

If you agree that bribing a police officer is and should be illegal and result in your arrest, then you have a gapping hole in your ideology that you need to explain why you give freebie law-breaking rights to corps but not individuals. Surely if you are an individual bribing a cop, you are doing it for you best interest in mind.

Second, how can you argue "if you remove the Constitution from the matter they really are not doing anything wrong" when the whole basis of the argument is the subversion of constitutional representation in the first place? It's a completely ridiculous stance to take.

Of course if there are no laws, then there are no laws broken. You are the one who says we are a nation of laws. Now you are arguing that with your ideology in place, corps. are exempt from the laws in a nation of laws?

There are laws, but just as a law on Mining regulations do not apply to potato farmers, the law regarding the structure of the federal government and the rights that must not be infringed upon by said government do not apply to corporations. Again, it is the person who is bribed's fault, as he is the person who should be respecting the Contitution in regards to the power of the federal government, not the corporation or buisness or private person who bribed. Amazingly enough, people can not accept bribes. And corporations can accept brides?

[John Galt]

Achilles The Myrmidon wrote: John Galt wrote: Rob wrote: John Galt wrote: Rob wrote: You won't find me promoting ethanol because of its mileage inefficiencies. Bio-diesel is another thing altogether.

Ahh. Well OK. But still, where is the shennanigans in regards to restricting biofuels?

Quote: I have to fully disagree with you here:

Quote: Business should be able to waste whatever money they want trying to buy off politicans. It's still the politican's fault.

IMO...when a political bribe happens, it is treason on behalf of the briber in attempts to disrupt constituent representation with a bribe and treasonist of a politician to accept and make good that bribe.

While I'm disgusted with the politicians to no end about this, I hold the aggresssor of the situation, the one proposing the bribe, as being more guilty by the mere fact that they instigated and by not only getting the ball rolling but creating the ball in the first place.

Anyway you cut it, they are stealing or attempting to steal constituent representation which is treasonist IMO.

My opinion can't be swayed on this by saying that businesses are people too because they are already represented privately as a citizen. Stepping into the fray with dollars in hand under the banner of a corp. is looking to buy more representation and often from congressmen and senators whose districts and states they do not live in.

That is an aggregious governmental manipulation IMO because they aren't only trying to seek a bigger hold on representation by their congressman, they are crossing borders and trying to usurp the representation that never belonged to them in the first place.

Well you'll have to disagree then. I place blame on the person who does the treason, or who dirties the Constitution, not the person who offers money to do it. I don't blame Russia for Alger Hiss. I blame Alger Hiss for Alger Hiss.

Before you start talking about hit men I will stop you. The rent-seeking buisnesses are looking out for their bestintrests, not the best intrests of the Constitution. They don't care about the Constitution and frankly, it really shouldn't matter to them. This is just another buisness transaction because if you remove the Constitution from the matter they really are not doing anything wrong. So who does the Constitution apply to? The government and those people in it. Not buisnesses, the government. Again, I blame Alger Hiss for Alger Hiss.

Come on John! That's a horrible comparison. As an individual, if you try to bribe a police officer, you are breaking the law and should be arrested right?

If you agree that bribing a police officer is and should be illegal and result in your arrest, then you have a gapping hole in your ideology that you need to explain why you give freebie law-breaking rights to corps but not individuals. Surely if you are an individual bribing a cop, you are doing it for you best interest in mind.

Second, how can you argue "if you remove the Constitution from the matter they really are not doing anything wrong" when the whole basis of the argument is the subversion of constitutional representation in the first place? It's a completely ridiculous stance to take.

Of course if there are no laws, then there are no laws broken. You are the one who says we are a nation of laws. Now you are arguing that with your ideology in place, corps. are exempt from the laws in a nation of laws?

There are laws, but just as a law on Mining regulations do not apply to potato farmers, the law regarding the structure of the federal government and the rights that must not be infringed upon by said government do not apply to corporations. Again, it is the person who is bribed's fault, as he is the person who should be respecting the Contitution in regards to the power of the federal government, not the corporation or buisness or private person who bribed. Amazingly enough, people can not accept bribes. And corporations can accept brides?

Bribes to do what? And why not?



I am wholly willing to accept bribes. Or as we might call it "money for goods and services provided" in the normal world.

[Achilles The Myrmidon]

John Galt wrote: Achilles The Myrmidon wrote: John Galt wrote: Rob wrote: John Galt wrote: Rob wrote: You won't find me promoting ethanol because of its mileage inefficiencies. Bio-diesel is another thing altogether.

Ahh. Well OK. But still, where is the shennanigans in regards to restricting biofuels?

Quote: I have to fully disagree with you here:

Quote: Business should be able to waste whatever money they want trying to buy off politicans. It's still the politican's fault.

IMO...when a political bribe happens, it is treason on behalf of the briber in attempts to disrupt constituent representation with a bribe and treasonist of a politician to accept and make good that bribe.

While I'm disgusted with the politicians to no end about this, I hold the aggresssor of the situation, the one proposing the bribe, as being more guilty by the mere fact that they instigated and by not only getting the ball rolling but creating the ball in the first place.

Anyway you cut it, they are stealing or attempting to steal constituent representation which is treasonist IMO.

My opinion can't be swayed on this by saying that businesses are people too because they are already represented privately as a citizen. Stepping into the fray with dollars in hand under the banner of a corp. is looking to buy more representation and often from congressmen and senators whose districts and states they do not live in.

That is an aggregious governmental manipulation IMO because they aren't only trying to seek a bigger hold on representation by their congressman, they are crossing borders and trying to usurp the representation that never belonged to them in the first place.

Well you'll have to disagree then. I place blame on the person who does the treason, or who dirties the Constitution, not the person who offers money to do it. I don't blame Russia for Alger Hiss. I blame Alger Hiss for Alger Hiss.

Before you start talking about hit men I will stop you. The rent-seeking buisnesses are looking out for their bestintrests, not the best intrests of the Constitution. They don't care about the Constitution and frankly, it really shouldn't matter to them. This is just another buisness transaction because if you remove the Constitution from the matter they really are not doing anything wrong. So who does the Constitution apply to? The government and those people in it. Not buisnesses, the government. Again, I blame Alger Hiss for Alger Hiss.

Come on John! That's a horrible comparison. As an individual, if you try to bribe a police officer, you are breaking the law and should be arrested right?

If you agree that bribing a police officer is and should be illegal and result in your arrest, then you have a gapping hole in your ideology that you need to explain why you give freebie law-breaking rights to corps but not individuals. Surely if you are an individual bribing a cop, you are doing it for you best interest in mind.

Second, how can you argue "if you remove the Constitution from the matter they really are not doing anything wrong" when the whole basis of the argument is the subversion of constitutional representation in the first place? It's a completely ridiculous stance to take.

Of course if there are no laws, then there are no laws broken. You are the one who says we are a nation of laws. Now you are arguing that with your ideology in place, corps. are exempt from the laws in a nation of laws?

There are laws, but just as a law on Mining regulations do not apply to potato farmers, the law regarding the structure of the federal government and the rights that must not be infringed upon by said government do not apply to corporations. Again, it is the person who is bribed's fault, as he is the person who should be respecting the Contitution in regards to the power of the federal government, not the corporation or buisness or private person who bribed. Amazingly enough, people can not accept bribes. And corporations can accept brides?

Bribes to do what? And why not?



I am wholly willing to accept bribes. Or as we might call it "money for goods and services provided" in the normal world. Really?That's good to know.So you will sell anything for the right price?