Stephen Trapani wrote:
Capt. JG wrote:
"Stephen Trapani" wrote in message

More than enough money to supply all that stuff disappeared into the
companies run by Cheney's chums. Twice as much of our money was
spent to
give the USCG the equipment they need and they didn't get so much as a
usable RIB out of it.

Any clue why a politician would want to risk life in prison to make
their "chums" rich? People spout this so much and never stop to think
of how ridiculous it is. These are bad, evil people taking huge risks
for someone else?? It doesn't make a bit of sense.

Huh? People risk jail time all the time for profit motive. They do it
for themselves and for others, which is not mutually exclusive.

Let's try again. The popular contention is that all these politicians
are making decisions so that their *friends* can profit, not themselves.
As we all know, high profile politicians like presidents and
vice-presidents have their finances highly scrutinized until the day
they die. Any large influx of money would shortly be obvious to the
entire world, so we all know they can't get any significant kickbacks or
profit of any sort remotely related to any companies who profited while
the politician was in office.

So the kooks, who have to come up with some motive for their contention
of corruption, are then relegated to claiming the politician is doing it
all for their friends. As if there is or ever has been any type of
criminal who does such a thing. I've never heard of any criminal who
wasn't going to profit from his crime if he succeeded. Has anyone else?
People just don't break the law for that reason. It's not part of human
psychology. Never has been.

You're either very naive, or you think the readers are.

The entire business and political world works on favors given without an
explicit promise of the favor returned. Most of us only see this on a
small scale: the vendor gives an extra portion, knowing that it will
create goodwill that will come back eventually. But if you give a
sizable contribution to one politician, that will guarantee a favorable
hearing not just with that politician, but with all others of his party.
And when a businessman gets favorable treatment from politicians,
essentially stealing from the common folk, is he called a thief? Nope,
he's called a "conservative." (OK, a few are called Democrats)


And yet the kook claims goes on and on because no one ever stops for
five seconds to think about how ridiculous it is.

Are these the kooks who are still wondering where their investment in
Enron went to?