Originally posted by: Craig234
Originally posted by: blackangst1
Originally posted by: Bowfinger
Originally posted by: blackangst1
Originally posted by: Bowfinger
Originally posted by: blackangst1
Originally posted by: Craig234
There's nothing scandalous about Gore paying for offsets to the company he runs for that.
People are such simpletons sometimes - they can't distinguish a private citizen voluntarily buying something without any conflict of interest, and government officials with ulterior motives in where they spend taxpayer money, with potential scandal.
It's like calling it a scandal if Richard Branson gave away CD's that he bought from his own company, Virgin Records, and pays to fly on his own airline.
*What* is wrong with Gore spending the money at his company Michaels? And *he* makes *you* sick?
Then I assume you dont have a problem whatsoever with Cheney profiting from Haliburton's contracts? Good to know.
(/Taps sarcasm meter. Nothing. Hmmm.)
Gore is spending
his own money. Cheney is spending
taxpayers' money. I would think even the most blind partisan could see the difference.
Wait what?
Haliburton is a publicly traded stock. When Haliburton gets new contracts, the stock goes up, therefore stockholders make money.
Where does public money come in?
I responded directly to your comment, now bolded above. To whatever extent Gore earns a profit from paying his own company for carbon offsets, he is doing so with his own, personal money. Cheney, on the other hand, is paying Halliburton with taxpayers' money. That's all the difference in the world, and why most people would "have a problem ... with Cheney profiting from Halliburton's contracts." (as you stated).
eh...Cheney's income from Haliburton is derived from a severance package...that in NO WAY is related to Iraqi contracts....
dammit this is derailing the thread
But Im right.
The issue is not that direct income.
The issue is Cheney influencing taxpayer money into the pockets of his cronies at Halliburton against the taxpayer interest.
In a system of cronyism, as we have, such as the revolving door between defense contractors and Pentagon representatives, you don't need 'direct' payola.
It's a big reason our anti-corruption laws are too limited. Heck, even the incredibly corrupt Tom DeLay barely got caught. Duke Cunningham is the exception, with direct bribes.
But of course the topic here is that there is no comparison between Gore spending his money with his company, and any Cheney pushing taxpayer money to cronies.
It's like trying to smear Gore by saying "Al Capone! OJ Simpson! Charles Manson! Al Gore! Adolf Hitler! Osama bin Laden!"
Just attack him and put his name with bad things and let the poor readers see him as somehow like the others in the list. It works well.
It's easy to make the smear, and takes time to explain why the smear is a lie.