Congress Rebukes SEC Investigation

Comments (5)

  1. Kevin Beck says:

    This is further proof that government meddles too much in commerce as it is. The proper solution would involve recognizing that “regulate” means what our Founders originally meant it as: To allow the regular flow (of commerce). When this definition was changed in the 1930’s, it suddenly allowed for excess meddling by government into everyone’s business.

    If this genie had never been allowed to leave the bottle, then this issue would all be a moot point today.


  2. Dee says:

    Sorry sir – you seem to be living with the idea that there is the rule of law in North America. There isn’t such a thing – the modern version is the rule of money: If you have enough money ANYTHING is legal (and if you don’t have any money someone will help you – now if you have only some money – sorry you have NO recourse!)


  3. Steve says:

    I have always wondered how a guy goes to Washington as a “public servant” and emerges a couple of decades later as a multi-millionaire. Bill and Hillary are perfect examples. Not to mention the likes of Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi. They even spread it to their relatives and friends- we need TERM LIMITS.


  4. G13man says:

    And the politicians wonder why they are considered corrupt by the average person? Guess they should be considered ignorant, also.


  5. Glen says:

    Gee, THAT’S funny? I remember when Martha Stewart went to prison for insider trading. I guess the law ONLY applies to SOME, but not ALL? Well, the way I see it is if the law only applies to PEASANTS, and NOT to those in government, then THERE IS NO LAW! NOBODY should be considered ABOVE the law. THAT’S WHY WE HAVE “LAW!” Guess we’ll have to SHOW the government in NOVEMBER that THEY ARE NOT IMMUNE to it? COME ON NOVEMBER! 🙂


Add Comment