Quote:
Originally Posted by DanaC
He put the dog crate on top of the car? Wtf was he thinking?
|
And then posted was this reasoning. It was legal. Therefore it is OK.
So it is legal for Wall Street to subvert the nation's and world's economy. That is also OK?
Regulations need not exist for industries, persons, etc who are responsible. Heavy regulations are created after and because that industry or person is irresponsible. The reasoning: "it was legal and therefore acceptable". Therefore some, using that logic, loved the financial corruption of the 2000s and even Mission Accomplished. Legal was to hide costs ($billions) of Mission Accomplished outside of the federal budget. Yes it was good to not show those expenses in the budget. Therefore the people would not know its real costs. 'Legal' says that lie was also good and acceptable.
It was legal to put the dog on top of a speeding car? Being responsible is about lying - as long as no law exists to ban the lie? That was the reasoning. And not just Romney's. Others here are using the same reasoning.
We have a serious problem. Many assume that because something is legal, it is quite acceptable. Legal was to lie about Mission Accomplished. Legal was to deregulate financial corruption. Legal was to put a dog on top of the car. That proves all were good and acceptable.
A president was not impeached for massacring almost 5000 troops uselessly in Mission Accomplished. He was not impeached. That also proves it was a good thing? It was legal. Therefore it was good?