The State's Double Standards Strike Again!

[boxcar]

I think the corruption in D.C. might extend deeper than the deepest pit in hell. It's just mind-boggling.

THE CONGRESS INSIDER TRADING SCANDAL IS OUTRAGEOUS: Rep. Spencer Bachus Should Resign In Disgrace

You cannot read the description of the options trading allegedly conducted by Rep. Spencer Bachus during the financial crisis and conclude anything other than the following:

Our government is completely corrupt.

Yes, this behavior may be technically legal, because of an absurd loophole that makes insider-trading rules not apply to Congress.

Yes, this behavior may be widespread on Capitol Hill.

No, there is no universe in which a reasonable person would consider this behavior ethical or okay.

http://www.businessinsider.com/the-c...iately-2011-11

Did you catch that, Mosty? The article seems to be saying that ethics trumps legal status.

Boxcar

[lamboguy]

NANCY POLOSII got 4000 shares of visa stock on new issue. her husband made $100k in a week on the deal

HILARY CLINTON is the best pork belly trader i have ever seen in my entire life. she has never had a loser! she is like kevin duffy picking football games, he has never lost a game vs the spread in 2 decades.

[boxcar]

'60 Minutes' Blows The Lid Off Congressional Insider Trading

"This is a venture opportunity," Schweizer told '60 Minutes.' "This is an opportunity to leverage your position in public service and use that position to enrich yourself, your friends, and your family."

http://www.businessinsider.com/congr...inutes-2011-11

Corruption in D.C., Mosty, is probably a little more than skin-deep, which is what you think the extent is, according to things you have stated in the past.

Boxcar


Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/congr...#ixzz1digxVeoR

[lamboguy]

hey i got to sit here and try to pick winners in these horses to try to stay even for what these people down at the congress have done to me! i only wish i was as good as them

[thaskalos]

What possible reason can there be for allowing Congressmen to insider-trade?

Don't they have enough shady dealings already available to them?

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

What possible reason can there be for allowing Congressmen to insider-trade?

Because Money is their idol? How convenient they leave that kind of loophole in the law.

Don't they have enough shady dealings already available to them?

The wicked are never satisfied with their unjust gains.

It appears Greediness has finally found its way to D.C. -- or maybe it was always there?

Boxcar

[lamboguy]

Originally Posted by boxcar

Because Money is their idol? How convenient they leave that kind of loophole in the law.



The wicked are never satisfied with their unjust gains.

It appears Greediness has finally found its way to D.C. -- or maybe it was always there?

Boxcar

they are all going to choke with that money they stole and ruined the fine people of this country chasing the stuff.

[lamboguy]

gee whiz this guy spencer bachus was worse than boenher and polisi, boenher and polosi went long on their info. this guy bachus was in a meeting with geitner, rubin, and paulson. they didn't even allow cell phones in the meeting. after the meeting he ran to the nearest phone and bought put options on the whole stock market to go down! this information is not considered inside info, but to me it looks better than inside info. none of these guys would answer the reporters.

i always said there was no difference between republicans and democrats, conservetives and liberals. all of them go after the cash the same way, and go for as much of it as they can get away with.

seriously you guys that think the political party that you favor is better than the other are more nuts than myself.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by lamboguy

gee whiz this guy spencer bachus was worse than boenher and polisi, boenher and polosi went long on their info. this guy bachus was in a meeting with geitner, rubin, and paulson. they didn't even allow cell phones in the meeting. after the meeting he ran to the nearest phone and bought put options on the whole stock market to go down! this information is not considered inside info, but to me it looks better than inside info. none of these guys would answer the reporters.

i always said there was no difference between republicans and democrats, conservetives and liberals. all of them go after the cash the same way, and go for as much of it as they can get away with.

seriously you guys that think the political party that you favor is better than the other are more nuts than myself.

The one thing they all have in common is that they're all liberals, regardless of the Party labels. Not one of them have a shred of decency or integrity in their entire body.

Boxcar

[lsbets]

By mosty's standard he should dismiss this story immediately without giving it any thought because the author writes for one of Breitbart's websites.

[NJ Stinks]

Originally Posted by lamboguy

seriously you guys that think the political party that you favor is better than the other are more nuts than myself.

Lambo, while I agree that this stuff is beyond pathetic, I must point out that only one party is responsible for Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. Meanwhile, the other party lives for tax cuts or a flat tax or anything else that is good for numero uno.

Meanwhile, Boxcar lectures liberals on decency.

[newtothegame]

Originally Posted by NJ Stinks

Lambo, while I agree that this stuff is beyond pathetic, I must point out that only one party is responsible for Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. Meanwhile, the other party lives for tax cuts or a flat tax or anything else that is good for numero uno.

Meanwhile, Boxcar lectures liberals on decency.

Are you sure you wish to tout SS back to '35? I mean FDR was a great guy to you right?

[NJ Stinks]

Originally Posted by newtothegame

Are you sure you wish to tout SS back to '35? I mean FDR was a great guy to you right?

I'd tout SS anytime. And FDR too.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by NJ Stinks

Lambo, while I agree that this stuff is beyond pathetic, I must point out that only one party is responsible for Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. Meanwhile, the other party lives for tax cuts or a flat tax or anything else that is good for numero uno.

Meanwhile, Boxcar lectures liberals on decency.

There's nothing decent about Ponzi Schemes or over-bloated, poorly run, fraud-ridden welfare programs. So, yeah, I'll lecture away!

And you're "beyond pathetic" for believing that the vast majority of the politicians have the people's interests at heart when the only thing they really care about is advancing their socialist agendas for personal gain.

Boxcar

[newtothegame]

Originally Posted by NJ Stinks

I'd tout SS anytime. And FDR too.

If you will, it's rather lengthy but, take a gander and this paper published in 2009. You may find it rather interesting. Then again, maybe not!

You seriously might want to look at the history of the social security act before touting it so broadly.
I will tell you personally, it has evolved into something needed but, hasnt always had such honorable intentions. Keep in mind, corporations (remember those big evil people?) were in support of this as well....I wonder why??

"Most people now think liberals and labor leaders created the program because they are the ones who defend it. But as this document will show, the basic principles behind old-age insurance were created and actively supported by the corporate moderates who owned and controlled the biggest and most powerful corporations of the 1920s and 1930s, companies such as Standard Oil of New Jersey, General Electric, and Metropolitan Life Insurance. In fact, government social insurance, including both unemployment insurance and old-age insurance, made enormous business and political sense to corporate moderates from the 1930s to the early 1970s. They only turned against it as part of a more general ideological and political attack on "big government" that began in the late 1970s in the face of a new set of economic and political problems caused by skyrocketing oil prices, stagflation, and the pressures put on government budgets by the social movements that arose in the 1960s."

http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesam..._security.html