Comments (3)

• Luke

  So what is the point of this article? Isn't it true that politicians enjoy a whole host of goods and services at taxpayer expense? Although the implication of the article was that politicians drive cars that are more luxurious than the population as a whole drives, I didn't think the list of cars was any more luxurious than one representing the population as a whole. It wasn't clear that the expenses listed were monthly, nor was it clear what the individual expenses leading to the total in each case were. If the monthly expenses were out of line in some (even many) cases, due for example to patronage, the article could have dealt with that issue. Talk about a pointless article....

  Published: March 14, 2006 11:19 AM

• Vince Daliessio

  Yeah, you posted the same canned answer on LibertyGuys. Why should these crooks be getting anything from us at all? Just about every member of the legislature (Ron Paul, Russ Feingold and a few others excepted)spend most of his or her time currying favor with various interest groups in preparation for lucrative, ex-post-facto bribes such as consulting, employment, lobbying, or director's gigs. Why should we even pay them anything?

  Published: March 15, 2006 8:49 AM

• Smythe

  The article underscores the rise of an increasingly unaccountable and increasingly well-off mandarin class. It is the duty of all free people to stop participating in elections so the fraud can be exposed for what it is: net tax consumers deciding who gets to be el Jefe until the next election.

  The next time you see a group of comfortably middle-class retirees, ask them what they did for a living. Most of them are former civil servants.

  Published: March 16, 2006 8:31 AM