U.S. Is Finding Its Role in Business Hard to Unwind - NYTimes (Business) http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/14/b...=th&adxnnlx=1253001827-Z0r3i2NBPOo2w2zPtsdsvQ The founding fathers and the Continental Congress must surely be rolling over in their graves. I could have sworn I learned that the U.S. government did not have the legal authority to be an owner/share holder in private enterprise(?) How is it that, over the past decade, Haliburton was castigated constantly, due to involvement of officials in "FORMER association" with that company, yet the government under Obama now holds 60% of GMC (that's a controlling percentage)? Something isn't right! How is it a poor slob can't walk into a bank for a loan to "bail himself out", yet on my way to work, I saw my bank with all kinds of equipment in their yard, and when I went home for lunch, they had brand new landscaping? Sure, some contractor got big $$$, in hard times, for doing that job, but what about infrastructure with bailout bucks? Shouldn't we be concentrating more on "banking business" than "cosmetics"? Bridges are collapsing and we spend on landscaping??? I don't get it, but according to the "Yes We Can" folks, "that's why you lost"? What, exactly, have the "winners" won? What about liberal usage, ad nausum, of the Gore quote, "what should be up is down, and what should be down is up"? Reminds me of the Fun House at the carnival -- no matter how it's billed, you always leave demanding your money back!