I guess you'd make a great Chinese citizen. -----Original Message----- From: Edmund Storms [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 26 September 2008 19:48 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Cc: Edmund Storms Subject: Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout
On Sep 26, 2008, at 12:18 PM, Remi Cornwall wrote: > Ed: what you say sounds cynical and jaded. I suppose it does to someone who believes in the ideal function of government. However, if you examine the actual behavior, you will find that the number of laws always grow in number and complexity. The tax laws are a good example. This may not be what people want to hear but it is a fact. Some of this growth takes placed because conditions change and new laws are required to control the technology. At the same time, industry works very hard to protect and enlarge its self interest. Most people have no idea what laws and rules exist until they are subjected to the legal system. In addition, the government works hard to hide many laws that benefit certain industries or individuals. Personally, I would rather accept how the system actually operates rather than be surprised because I have an "ideal" understanding of what I wish were true. Ed > > > Jed*: If you think they give back 'their' powers then I think you > are living > in cloud cuckoo land. > > Leaking Pen: The government **IS** the biggest **corporation** bar- > none. > > It's the biggest show in town for the old bloods since we won't > worship them > anymore in church or on thrones. > > > This democrat veto needs to be explored: replace society or > government with > Reich and capitalist with Jew and then you will see the scapegoating > going > on. > > > * In recent times: Patriot Act in UK RIPA (Regulatory and > Investigative > Powers Act - phone tapping and so forth) and many more I could find > if I was > a lawyer and constitutional expert. > > -----Original Message----- > From: leaking pen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 26 September 2008 18:58 > To: vortex-l@eskimo.com > Subject: Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC News of the bailout > > 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? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> > > >
