you don't see anything wrong. What if he wrote legislation that required the government to pay him $10 million? Would that be wrong? Its a fairly blatant piece of corruption - he writes, sponsors and ensurs that legislation that he directly benefits from. And you see nothing wrong with this?
This is very basic ethics. On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 7:08 PM, Casey Dougall - Uber Website Solutions <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 6:41 PM, Larry C. Lyons <[email protected]>wrote: > >> >> Yes I am very well aware of how much oil is in the Tar Sands. That's >> not the issue. The issue is the apparent conflict of interest. >> >> So you have no problems with legislators advancing bills that will >> result in their receiving a substantial profit? I think you need to >> read up on the definitions of corruption. >> >> > I hate the guy as much as anyone and believe politics are crooks but I just > don't see anything wrong. Everyone invests money, so I'm hard pressed to > figure out how this is anything but a smart move on his part. > > The pipeline is going to happen, it will, it just will. Why not make money > on the whole deal? > > Or should you not be allowed to invest at all while you are in office? > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:345379 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
