What is a government? You treat it like some seperate entity. It shouldn't be. Government is society. It is US. A government should be a tool of a society to set up its rules. If it becomes seperate from that society, well, its no longer needed.
On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 10:31 AM, Remi Cornwall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > How do you regulate government then? Who governs the governors? When do > governments vote themselves less power? > > I'm in agreement about corporations. > > -----Original Message----- > From: leaking pen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 26 September 2008 18:08 > To: vortex-l@eskimo.com > Subject: Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout > > The American constitution was formed with the concept of freedom for > people, and that coorporations would do their best to oppress people. > And they were right. They had the East Indies Trading Company, they > knew what evil could be done. If such large businesses are allowed to > exist, they must be regulated. And before you give me free market > crap, a market in which such a large company exists is, by definition, > no longer a free market, as those companies begin to provide external > forces on the market themselves. > > On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 9:43 AM, Remi Cornwall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: >> I'm not convinced about the need for more government. >> >> It attracts the Machiavellian type who don't deal in facts and distort > truth >> (such as blaming the credit crunch on the free market when the demos > vetoed >> reform). >> >> It attracts unproductive hangers-on to big public projects. >> >> It has allowed the massive build up of a stifling science establishment. >> >> I just find it like a 16th century scientist supporting the church or a >> monarchy. It's the opposite of progress to me. Just looking at the > character >> of the people on the left it is the-lesser-of-two-evils to favour the > right. >> The American constitution was forged in the light of the Enlightenment. >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: leaking pen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Sent: 26 September 2008 17:27 >> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com >> Subject: Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout >> >> Less government on the individual. MORE on the corporation. and lets >> remove this political fiction of coorp as person, please! >> >> On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 8:27 AM, Remi Cornwall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> wrote: >>> A plague on both their houses! >>> >>> The less government the better. Trust your constitution that's why it was >>> written. >>> >>> New energy will empower people to self-reliance. >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Jones Beene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> Sent: 26 September 2008 16:08 >>> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com >>> Subject: Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout >>> >>> ----- Original Message ---- >>> >>> ... apparently Remi does not remember the infamous Keating Five - >>> >>> >>> ... from the net, a little "refresher" lesson in how recent political >>> history has this nagging tendency to repeat itself every new generation: >>> >>> John McCain & The Ghost of Keating Five >>> >>> posted last week by Ari Berman >>> >>> Back in the 1980s, when the US faced a major savings & loan crisis, >>> John McCain intervened to protect S&L magnate Charles Keating - a >>> major McCain donor and friend--from federal regulators. McCain was >>> later rebuked by the Senate Ethics Committee for "poor judgement" and >>> embarrassed by the $112,000 in campaign contributions, trips and gifts >>> he accepted from Keating. Following the entanglement, McCain became a >>> born-again reformer and tried to scrub the Keating episode from his >>> resume. >>> >>> >> > http://www.thenation.com/blogs/campaignmatters/361711/john_mccain_the_ghost_ >>> of_keating_five >>> >>> In fact - it has been reported that Wiki was under intense pressure from >>> McCain operatives when the "new" S&L Scandal become issue numeror uno in >> the >>> public's view - to have the pictures removed from the Wiki entry ... IOW >>> even if they knew they could not rewrite the history of the indent (but >> were >>> able to tone down some of the rhetoric) they did not want the actual >>> "picture" of McCain there - as apparently that was too inflamatory !!! >>> >>> ... or else some of the expected McCain supporters don't read much but > are >>> impressed with visual images? >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> > > > >
