Why is this OKAY for government officials, but not okay for people who often become executives or CEOs after years, decades, of hard work?

Hypocrites is too kind a word.

On August 28th, 2009 at 3:41 pm, walterc said:

Yeah, I think a Culture of Corruption” magazine is what this Country needs.

The new corruption cases are appearing almost hourly now.

great idea!!! either that or a weekly recap blog page…

shovel-ready project was finished on Saturday: Ted Kennedy.

Is it too soon to laugh out loud?

And it was televised, too. Too late to “claw” back any money he’d stuffed away.

On August 28th, 2009 at 3:55 pm, J S Ragman said:
The article quotes experts who express hopes that . . .
Well, my daddy used to tell me to hope in one hand, and crap in the other one, and see which one fills up first.

Ooh! Ooh! Pick me! I know the answer to this!

Birds of a feather…

f$%k together. I know, Iknow, I have no future as a poet…

“The Rule of Law thus implies limits to the scope of Legislation: it restricts it to the kind of general rules known as formal law and excludes legislation either directly aimed at particular people or at enabling anybody to use the coercive power of the state for the purpose of such discrimination. It means, not that everything is regulated by law, but, on the contrary, that the coercive power of the state can be used only in cases defined in advance by the law and in such a way that it can be forseen how it will be used. A particular enactment can thus infringe on The rule of Law. Anyone ready to deny this would have to contend that whether The Rule of Law prevails today [1944] in Germany, Italy or Russia depends on whether the dictators have obtained their absolute power by constitutional means.”

From F. A. Hayek 1944 – Page 120 – The Road To Serfdom
Text and Documents – The Definitive Edition
Edited by Bruce Caldwell 2007

There is also a Footnote to this page relating to infringements of The Rule of Law, particularly by Facists.

This could lead me to think that Czars are counter to The Rule of Law.

Feinberg is also active politically, making more than $300,000 in campaign contributions since 1990, mostly to Democrats, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

I’m sure those large contributions to Democrats had nothing to do with Feinberg’s Czar appointment. And even if it turns out that all the Czars have given heavy campaign contributions to Democrats, it’s pure coincidence.

Obama pledged that his election would be the end of politics as usual and the beginning of a “new era of responsibility”. So I can assure you that political favoritism had no role in selecting any of the Czars. As Janet Napolitano would say, “there was no kind of political issues involved there.” /sarc off