[9YearLurker]

Santorum appears to be a piker in crony capitalism compared to Perry or the cash-in-on-political-influence business compared to Newt, but yes, this stinks.

The only reason companies put former pols on their boards is for shielding from government shakedowns or demands, at best, and corruption at worst—as appears to be the case here.

[Cincinatus' Wife]

The case for Perry’s venture capitalismThere’s a big difference between the Texas and statist approaches - There has been a lot of debate about Gov. Rick Perry’s economic development funds. The criticism centers on the idea that the Texan’s funds create a “Solyndra problem” for him, that by investing in businesses that bring jobs to the state, Mr. Perry has the same job-creation approach President Obama displayed in backing federal loans to a solar-energy firm.

Equating the two men in this way provides a convenient symmetry, but it’s also a false comparison that misses why many free marketers are comfortable with Gov. Perry even while critical of Solyndra.”……

[Tennessean4Bush]

...but yes, this stinks.

No, it doesn't. The only thing that stinks is your woeful attempt at logic.

The only reason companies put former pols on their boards is for shielding from government shakedowns or demands, at best, and corruption at worst

No, it is not. It is, and always has been, for connections to either investors or customers.

as appears to be the case here.

Do you really, honestly, think that the UHS board and senior management are involved in the day-to-day management of some psychiatric facility which is probably one of 20 facilities (read 5%) in a less than 10% growth business unit for UHS and whose entire business unit represents probably less than 5% of its gross income (and that may be incredibly generous)?