> WillBo wrote:
> Somehow the definition of campaign staffers has been expanded to
> include the doorman and other staff at his condo (Ritz-Carlton)

Hmmm ... well THAT's a little different.  If he's using the money for
personal stuff then he deserves to be flogged.

> Look, the real problem here is going to be credibility. If you're not
> on the up-and-up, how is it you can expect others to be?
>

Agree with you here.

> disingenuous... it is either illegal or not. it is either punishable
> or not.
>

I don't agree, but then I'm a big Andy Griffith fan.  See I thought
Barney was WAY over the top.  He would take your position: it's either
illegal or not.

Andy took the utilitarian approach: law exists to serve society.  It's
a tool that CAN be used, but needn't ALWAYS be used.

BTW - how much money are we talking about here?  Because if it's small
claims court type jing ($5k) then there a good argument to made that
keeping the law OUT is the best course of action.  For example, there
are many people that make a good living as binding arbiters.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Introducing the Fusion Authority Quarterly Update. 80 pages of hard-hitting,
up-to-date ColdFusion information by your peers, delivered to your door four 
times a year.
http://www.fusionauthority.com/quarterly

Archive: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:217844
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/subscribe.cfm
Unsubscribe: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5

Reply via email to