Re: MD Quality takes a hit

From: Platt Holden (
Date: Tue Mar 09 2004 - 14:46:02 GMT

  • Next message: Paul Turner: "RE: MD When is an idea an Idea?"

    Hi Rick,

    Welcome back! Great to hear from you.
    > Platt, my friend, your characterization of the Stewart Jury as "envious
    > jurists" who conspired " to bring down in individual whose life was
    > dedicated to quality" strikes me as preposterous.

    Maybe preposterous to you, my friend. But, one of the jurors let the cat
    out of bag when he said that convicting Martha "was a blow for the little
    people." Not only that, several jurists, expressing childish petulance,
    said they were "insulted" that Martha didn't testify.

    > Martha was a thief who
    > illegally received and acted on insider information to enrich herself and
    > then lied about it at every turn.

    How did Martha "enrich herself?" Preserving the value of you assets is
    hardly "enrichment."

    > She lied under oath, forged documents,
    > and even got others to lie and forge on her behalf.

    An apt description of Clinton's behavior during the Lewinsky affair. Yet
    do you see him behind bars? Hardly equal, even-handed justice in my book.

    >The jury was dead-on.
    > She stole $40,000 at the expense of legitimate investors as surely as if
    > she robbed a bank with a gun and then she tried to lie and cheat her way
    > out of it.

    The real thief in this story is the Federal Drug Administration which
    disapproved of ImClone's application for a new anti-cancer drug, and
    application which they later approved! Your friendly government robbed
    ImClone investors, not Martha.

    > Regardless of the alleged quality of her products or efforts on
    > behalf of "average shlubs", her refusal to plea to the crime she actually
    > committed and decision to lie and cover-up endangered the corporation she
    > built and the hundreds, if not thousands, of hard-working "average shlubs"
    > who depend on it for their livelihoods.

    All of which pales in comparison to the coarsening effect on the culture
    of Clinton's lying and sexual escapades. Furthermore, anyone who depends
    on someone else for his livelihood better grow up and get some skills that
    are marketable regardless of who signs their paychecks.

    > I can just hear them saying, "Sure
    > I can't feed my family anymore, but the quality of throw pillows at K-Mart
    > is just so much better than it used to be. Thank God for Martha!!!"

    Yes, there are always those who will whine, blame others for their
    problems and claim the world owes them a living. These are not the people
    I respect because, by reason of their dependence on others, they can never
    muster the courage to effect any change. It's the "not nice" entrepreneurs
    like Martha, regularly bombarded with insults like "heartless bitch and
    the "ice princess" who respond to DQ, take risks, and move culture
    forward. As Pirsig put it:

    "The strongest moral argument against capital punishment is that it
    weakens a society's Dynamic capability-its capability for change and
    evolution. It's not the "nice" guys who bring about real social change.
    "Nice" guys look nice because they're conforming. It's the "bad" guys, who
    only look nice a hundred years later, that are the real Dynamic force in
    social evolution."

    Like the Zuni priests' persecution of the brujo, our Zuni Feds found a
    trophy target in Martha and brought her to trial. The perjury charge was
    just a cover; they couldn't abide her supposed "arrogance" in the face of
    their almighty presence.


    MOQ.ORG -
    Mail Archives:
    Aug '98 - Oct '02 -
    Nov '02 Onward -
    MD Queries -

    To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Mar 09 2004 - 14:45:37 GMT