Life After Congress May 25, 2008
Posted by Resident Egoist in : Interventionism, Law and Government , add a commentMost people in this country lead their daily lives with the illusion that there exists some sort of fundamental difference between our two major political parties; namely the Republicans and the Democrats. Here’s and interesting passage from an article by Congressman Ron Paul that should put an end to the entertainment of this folly - not that I’m naive enough to think that it actually will:
[After leaving office, former members of Congress] find it quite convenient to associate with other former members of the opposing party and start a lobbying firm. What might have appeared to be contentious differences when in office are easily put aside to lobby their respected party members. Essentially no philosophic difference of importance exists — it’s only a matter of degree and favors sought, since both parties must be won over. The differences they might have had while they were voting members of Congress existed only for the purpose of appealing to their different constituencies, not serious differences of opinion as to what the role of government ought to be. This is the reality of bipartisanship. Sadly our system handsomely rewards those who lobby well and in a bipartisan fashion. Congressional service too often is a training ground or a farm system for the ultimate government service: lobbying Congress for the benefit of powerful and wealthy special interests.
This article from the Washington Post, though a bit old, offers greater (financial) perspective on the subject as well. Don’t miss it.
No Wonder Our Taxes Are So High! March 12, 2008
Posted by Resident Egoist in : Cultural Criticism, Law and Government , add a commentThere’s a finally a convincing theory to make sense of that complex question: Why are we lawfully robbed of so much of what we earn? I’m not sure about the people in other states, but in New York, we have an answer — which is that taxation is necessary so that our honorable politicians may be able to afford “a basic human necessity”: $4300 to spend a couple of hours with a whore, every now and then!
Please excuse my language today, I just find this sort of hypocrisy beyond outrageous! I wonder though what would make a man such as the governor, (i.e.: a rich, powerful man who without a doubt has an abundant selection of women at his disposal - freely, not to mention HIS WIFE!) would spend $80,000 a year for sex. Even Julia Roberts only charged $3000/week; Mr. Spitzer routinely shelled out the same amount for one freakin’ HOUR! Either these girls have some out-of-this-world skills, or “The Sheriff of Wall Street” must have some very, very, very sick fantasies! Most New Yorkers don’t even make near $80,000 a year … or even 2! But maybe I’m just falling victim to the Marxist notion of price.
Isn’t it amazing how it’s always the self-righteous ones that tend to be the sleaziest of them all, whether they be Republican or Democrat? I wonder what’s hiding in Obama’s closet(s)? Do you think he could be Muslim? Just kidding. He might be a socialist however.
P.S: On a more serious note, I believe prostitution should be perfectly legal … I just don’t think public officials (or anyone else, for that matter) should be able to enjoy it at my expense.