On 2007-11-08, Mike <mike@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> claimed:
> On Wed, 07 Nov 2007 09:18:34 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>
> It's amazing to me how people argue constantly about the technical
> details of msft vs. linux as if the extremely lopsided state of affairs
> in the software industry has anything at all to do with that. And yet an
> article like this that deals with the real root of the problem goes by
> virtually unnoticed. I've seen no response from the ms-shills to the
> assertion that msft's success is due primarily to illegally maintaining
> its monopoly and that the only reason msft gets away with it is that the
> gov't has been taken over by corporate interest in the form of lobbying
> and campaign contributions which have become so commonplace that it is
> now just legalized bribery. I believe the reason the ms-shills have
> nothing to say on this issue is that they know if illegal monopoly
> maintenance were to be eradicated by the gov't then msft would not
> survive very long in a competitive market. So they don't argue about it
> because they don't want any attention to be focused on it, they just want
> it to be kept as quiet as possible because the more light that gets shed
> on this issue the more bleak the outlook for msft. IMO, one of the best
> ways for a Linux Advocacy group to make an impact is to identify those
> political candidates which are taking a stand against excessive corporate
> influence and help bring them to the forefront of public awareness so
> they get elected and also to identify those politicians that are
> sycophants to corporate interest so they can be properly exposed and
> subsequently booted out of office.
Good luck finding any that aren't simply the other face on the same
coin.
They don't *need* to take money directly from crooks and thieves, so
some can go on for ages appearing to be honest, with only the interests
of the public they serve at heart. Among that group you'll be lucky to
find 1% that really are on the up-and-up. The rest just make sure the
money is laundered well enough that there's little chance they'll ever
get caught. And if they /do/ eventually get found out, either the time
between a particular payoff and discovery will be so separated by time
that the news won't make any waves at all, or they can claim
deniability, give the cash back, go after that one particular crook
(half-heartedly) that they've been tied to, and the dufii who elected
them in the first place will give them near landslides to put them back
to do more of the same.
"Honest politician" is more of an oxymoron than "Microsoft works" (I
was going to say "criminal defense attorney", but that one isn't an
oxymoron at all).
--
Be glad we don't get all the government we pay for.
|
|
