[overflow]

["David Nasset, Sr." <nassetd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, 04 Jun 2001 12:59:39 GMT, in rec.music.filk you wrote:

>Leslie Fish <lesliefish@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>"Rob Wynne" <doc@america.net> wrote in message
>>news:8o9S6.5614$8L1.24690@eagle.america.net...
>>>
>>> How about most of them?  The vast majority of people in public service
>>> are committed honest folks who believe in representing their
>>> constituents and doing the right thing.  It's the small minority of nuts
>>> and zealots who make the news.
>>>
>>    Alas, the nature of the beast corrupts the honest ones sooner or
later.
>>If you doubt that, look at our no-longer-lovable Senator McCain.
>
>No, I *do* doubt that.  In fact, more than that, I say it is
>unequivocally false.

Well, I do agree that the _inevitability_ of this corruption is false. But I
don't doubt that it is common. The system is biased towards this, as
insiders have been telling us for years. Neither do I doubt that being
"corrupt" (in that, regardless of your personal gain, you will "play dirty"
to support your personal _agenda_) is very common, though not universal,
among politicians.

>Libertarians and anarchists take what you say as a matter of faith.
>There's no use debating it, anymore than there's any use debating any
>other matter of personal religion.

Some do. Some, like myself, actually do the research, and check for personal
bias.

>But it's wrong, and counter-productive, in my opinion.

I disagree. Deliberately playing dirty and using deception to hide from your
constituents in order to promote your own agenda is very common among
politicians, to a degree approaching universal. And the system is biased
towards rewarding those who "toe the line" and penalize those "vote their
conscience".

Filksinger