What Ben Carson did was public service. There are good politicians out there, but it’s not a profession that generally draws the public spirited. It’s just a great way to get rich and powerful if you have no other useful talents. Ask Harry Reid. How much is he worth these days? Pretty nice given that Senators aren’t paid all that much. Now Joe Biden, he’s public spirited. He’s been broke his entire Senate career.
True. A person with skills that are actually useful would be better off staying out of politics. WHereas Barack Obama and most of his Congressional allies will make money doing nothing but talking. Just like they do now.
Yeah, I think you’re in the minority on that one. If you really believe that politics drew the public spirited, then you wouldn’t be running around like your hair was on fire about campaign finance reform.
It does draw the greedy as well, yes, but usually to less-public positions that require less accountability to the voters. Your ignorance is in denying that there can be any other motive for going into government service at all. What, did you think the battle of ACA was all about getting paid off?
It’s certainly easier to believe such a simpleminded view of the world, since it absolves you of any responsibility to do anything other than deplore the situation and root for your team. But it’s still profound ignorance.
No. There are some good people in the government. Lots of them, actually, just not a majority, although that’s my opinion, there’s no way to measure it. I’ve noticed something though. The good ones generally went into government after having real accomplishments outside it. Maybe they served in the military with distinction(John McCain). Maybe they ran a successful business(Mark Warner). Maybe they made a comedy show successful with their brilliant writing(Al Franken). Or perhaps they even served in government with distinction in a non-elected position(Jim Webb, Erskine Bowles). The point is, none of them NEEDED to run for office. It’s the ones where running for office is their whole life that you have to watch out for. Because they need the job so badly, they will be owned by the system in short order, assuming they even wanted to avoid in the first place.
There are exceptions to every group. But the group as a unit tends to be nonproductive and parasitical on the productive part of society.
Your vision of public service is to benefit society. I agree. But what actually happens is something called “extracting rents”, something which I’m sure you know about if you’ve studied politics 101 or even basic economics.
And you need to figure out what you think. If politics is public service, we have no need for campaign finance laws. And if government is a positive good rather than a necessary evil, we don’t need Constitutions limiting their powers.
So take awhile to figure out exactly what it is that you think about the role of government and the relative morality of the people who inhabit it, and get back to us.
What a goofy argument. You might as well say we shouldn’t have police officers if we can’t trust them to do their jobs without internal affairs departments and the 4th-6th Amendments.
Then you are spreading ignorance. I argued one side, with caveats, you argued the other, with none, and said I was just wrong and you were right. That’s a binary argument and you are making it.
Yes, but we already have those things. I don’t wish to speak for ElvisL1ves, but the message I took from his posts is that in the world as it currently exists (with campaign finance laws, et al.), politics draws those who are motivated by public service.
Hopefully, by outlawing corruption and abuses of power, we eliminate greed as a motive for politicians and public-mindedness is what’s left.
Did i say we shouldn’t have government? No, I just argued that politicians are a special breed attracted to power, and often money, who couldn’t make money in the productive sector. Without government, Harry Reid would be nobody. Ben Carson is somebody right now and if he never wins an elected office, will still be a somebody. Yet I bet Harry Reid is richer than Carson.
Yes. Even campaign finance laws themselves are examples, which those motivated only by greed (as is the case in adaher’s sadly-constricted worldview) would not have fought for, in fact they wouldn’t even think of them. The poor guy is so profoundly ignorant that he can’t even understand why ACA exists. :rolleyes:
We’ll never eliminate non-public-minded motivations, but we *can *contain them and continue to tighten those constraints.
Well, the government might start charging $87,000 for toilet seats, but the good news they’ll let you write them a check for $300 and they’ll call it even.
**adaher **is rather successfully derailing this thread into everyone trying to correct his abysmal ignorance, which is a hopeless cause. What say we ALL put him on ignore (either actually on the Ignore list or just by not responding to him) and getting back to what this thread is really about: PALATSR.
Granted, he is one and he makes it pathetically easy to laugh at him, but he’s not an in-the-public-eye, written-up-in-the-media, Republican politician. This thread isn’t about him or his positions, ideas, or mental malfunctions; let us not let him get in the way of the fun.
And yes, I’ve just added him to my Ignore list, and even if someone else quotes him in responding to any response to me he might make, I’m going to ignore him. After this post, he’s being relegated to my “not worth the time or energy it takes to spit” list, and long may he remain dry.