Post #234,703
11/17/05 12:39:09 PM
|
If you can say that with a straight face...
...after reading David Brin's "The Transparent Society", then we'll pick this conversation up and continue it. Until then, I'm not picking this fight.
When somebody asks you to trade your freedom for security, it isn't your security they're talking about.
|
Post #234,712
11/17/05 1:49:22 PM
|
I would regardless
there is oversight and then there is obtrusive, non-necessary watchdogging.
In today's environment its leaning too far towards the latter...with a specific focus on "throw their ass in jail" if they say something you don't like.
If you have read the news stories about this...those execs who said "to my knowledge we didn't" are now being threatened to jailtime by congresscritters when they very likely had no real knowledge of these lower staffer meetings and their subjects.
The PAC folks don't ask the Chief Exec to come to these things..they have local and lower business folks come to these things and call it "Government Relations".
Now, do you think that industry experts will be coming forward to offer advice in the future. Guarantee that these folks disallow it by policy...meaning the end result of this is a FURTHER dumbing down of our government.
Superb result.
If you push something hard enough, it will fall over. Fudd's First Law of Opposition
[link|mailto:bepatient@aol.com|BePatient]
|
Post #234,738
11/17/05 4:20:42 PM
|
Extremes again
Government should be watched, assuming a free society. When the government no longer has to ask permission to exercise power and the people do, it's not a free society any more. When government becomes as secretive as it has, the suspicion is that government isn't asking permission any more. We have had some pretty heavy handed government in the last 20 years or so. Very few really trust government or at best trust government to be corrupt. Hence the watchdogging mentality. If government would like to avoid this it could be more honest.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with government issuing a statement stating that after meeting with representitives (listed) from Big Oil, various enviromental lobbys (listed), and any other applicable special interest groups (listed), they have come up with an energy policy (stated), for these reasons (stated). It might engender some trust and possibly a decent policy. When they make decisions that shape the future of the entire country, it would be good to know why. If they won't say, then it is up to the citizenry to find out.
That's currently supposed to be done though oversight by our representitives. I would like to say that a candid and honest government would probably not have the same watchdogging going on, but I don't really remember one. I am fairly confident that a dishonest and secretive government is going to attact a lot of snoops and conspiricy theorists. My memory is good enough for that statement...
Oh, and having someone else do the dirty work for you is not a real good defense. So the concept of all those mini meenies doing dastardly deeds in spite of the best intentions of our exemplary, honest, and loyal representitives has probably been run through a horse.
|
Post #234,750
11/17/05 5:24:27 PM
|
Not that extreme
because given the way this and the last several "advice" sessions have gone...all "outed" by the watchdog groups that many feel are necessary...the end result has always been very bad PR >at best<.
If I were running a company I would have a completely changed process by now for my PAC group and my Gov Rltns team when dealing with the Fed...and it would start with "Thou shalt not"
If you push something hard enough, it will fall over. Fudd's First Law of Opposition
[link|mailto:bepatient@aol.com|BePatient]
|
Post #234,751
11/17/05 5:33:15 PM
|
That would be nice
A government of the corporations, by the corporations, for the corporations is called a fascist government. I'd prefer not to have one of those. I would like to see corporations stay out of government entirely. Then maybe people would get some representation; they sure can't outbid a major corp now.
Maybe the last several advice sessions have been bad PR, because they benefited a few corps allied with the present government at the expense of the vast majority of citizens. And they got caught. Poor babies... that can't be allowed to stand. Lock them doors! Shutter the windows! We don't need no stinking democracy. On with the secrecy!
Sheesh...
|
Post #234,770
11/17/05 7:55:28 PM
|
I see we are forgetting a simple credo
Those who can do, do
Those who can't do, teach.
Those who can't teach, teach gym.
Those who can't teach gym run for office.
(ok...I made up that last one ;-)
If you push something hard enough, it will fall over. Fudd's First Law of Opposition
[link|mailto:bepatient@aol.com|BePatient]
|
Post #234,823
11/18/05 8:26:36 AM
|
Speaking of "Government Relations".
How about [link|http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/16/AR2005111602518.html|Wal-Mart hiring the wife of a legislator] on a key vote: Preparing for a showdown with organized labor in the Maryland legislature, Wal-Mart has deployed at least a dozen Annapolis lobbyists and is making strong overtures to black lawmakers, including a $10,000 donation to help them pay for a recent conference.
The retail giant hopes to derail legislation that would effectively force the company to boost spending on employee health benefits. o o o Other lobbyists registered to represent the company included Pamela Metz Kasemeyer, the wife of a state senator who voted for the bill;... And this is in broad daylight! But then these folks gave us [link|http://bioguide.congress.gov/scripts/biodisplay.pl?index=A000059|Spiro Agnew] so we can "get the best government money can buy". Alex
The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt. -- Bertrand Russell
|
Post #234,830
11/18/05 9:31:52 AM
|
proves they are cheap bastards, thats all
In Alaska the wife of the chair insurance committee got 75K from insurance co's on workmans comp. 10k pocket change.
thanx,
bill
"the reason people don't buy conspiracy theories is that they think conspiracy means everyone is on the same program. Thats not how it works. Everybody has a different program. They just all want the same guy dead. Socrates was a gadfly, but I bet he took time out to screw somebodies wife" Gus Vitelli
Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 49 years. meep
questions, help? [link|mailto:pappas@catholic.org|email pappas at catholic.org]
|
