U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
 
Old 11-18-2011, 09:58 PM
 
12,439 posts, read 9,951,162 times
Reputation: 3129

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Memphis1979 View Post
Then you don't trust your countrymen. The country is founded on the principle that the government derives its power from the will of the governed, and that it is their consent and will that gives the government its power.

But you seem to want to live in an oligarchy in which the few get to decide to make the decisions for the masses. I don't like that country, it isn't the one written in the Constitution.
Actually the founders did not trust the mob that is why they established a Republic.

I don't trust most americans to be able to sift through all the propaganda that they are exposed to constantly by corporate advertising. That is why I am for eliminating corporate paid political ads.
Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-18-2011, 09:59 PM
 
Location: Sango, TN
24,889 posts, read 20,304,497 times
Reputation: 8606
Quote:
Originally Posted by hotair2 View Post
Actually the founders did not trust the mob that is why they established a Republic.

I don't trust most americans to be able to sift through all the propaganda that they are exposed to constantly by corporate advertising. That is why I am for eliminating corporate paid political ads.

Then how dare them write a constitution that gave the public so much power.

You hate your country, good to know.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-18-2011, 10:02 PM
 
Location: Beautiful Niagara Falls ON.
10,024 posts, read 10,133,598 times
Reputation: 8868
Quote:
Originally Posted by Memphis1979 View Post
We have a thing called freedom of speech. It allows news agencies to tell outright lies, if they so choose. We believe that are people are smart enough to see through the lies.

No censorship, no thanks
THAT IS NOT CENSORSHIP in any definition of the word. The people of Canada own the airwaves and we can and do create regulations on how those public airwaves will be used, just like the USA does only we care about different things. We don't get all bent out of shape by the sight of Janet Jacksons bare breast at the super bowl but we do care about some slime bag lying about our country, our leaders,our processes, we care about someone spreading hatred over our airwaves and it will not be allowed. We, the people of Canada grant you a permit to broadcast and if you don't like the conditions then write a freakin book or better yet go to the USA where you can even put bulls eye targets on the people you don't like.

If you believe that Americans are smart enough to see through the lies then you are living on a different planet than I am. It's just beyond belief the incredible garbage Americans accept as the truth because someone of towering intellect like Glen Beck tells them it's true. You know the one observation I make over and over again listening to these so called pundits. They one and all Hate the USA. they hate the government, they hate everything about the country and they hide behind this faux patriotism as if they alone are true Americans. They love the America of their perverted imaginations. An America that never existed and never will exist. If the whole freakin lot of them were all together on a ship that went down the country would not be losing anything at all and in fact the place would be far better for their absence.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-18-2011, 10:04 PM
 
12,439 posts, read 9,951,162 times
Reputation: 3129
Quote:
Originally Posted by Memphis1979 View Post
Then how dare them write a constitution that gave the public so much power.

You hate your country, good to know.
What are you talking about. Are you responding to my post? The founders did not trust the mob that is why they established a representative form of govt. I have no idea as to what you are talking about. That is the constitution.

I don't hate my country, but I am beginning to grow less fond of people with poor reading or reasoning skills.

Furthermore, freedom of speech does not mean that it is legal to tell outright lies. You can be sued for slander or libel, you can be prosecuted for telling lies to the FBI. You can be prosecuted for creating a panic by announcing a crisis that does not exist. You are simply mistaken.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-18-2011, 10:12 PM
 
Location: Sango, TN
24,889 posts, read 20,304,497 times
Reputation: 8606
Quote:
Originally Posted by hotair2 View Post
What are you talking about. Are you responding to my post? The founders did not trust the mob that is why they established a representative form of govt. I have no idea as to what you are talking about. That is the constitution.

I don't hate my country, but I am beginning to grow less fond of people with poor reading or reasoning skills.

To recap, you don't trust the people of the country. The founding fathers saw fit to have slaves, and do a bunch of other horrid things. But they did one great thing, they made a government that was BEHOLDEN to voters. Now, at the time what they thought of as voters were white land owners. Not women, not black folks, not renters, not all legal citizens 18 years and older.

So, if you want to go back to that, you are probably going to meet some resistence.

But, I digress. Here we are in the real world, and the government is supposed to be beholden to the people that vote. The voting pool has expanded, but that IS the constitution

You don't think its ok for the public majority to vote for the legislators that best represent them. You think that they should have their voting choices choosen for them by the highest corporate bidder, and then you are damned if you do, and damned if you don't.

That is what you are saying, and you may not like my response, but anyone with two functioning brain cells knows what I am saying.

Give the power to the people, or they will take it back through political change. We can't continue to give loans and bail outs to banks, corporations, and millionaires while expecting everyone else to "tighten your buckles".

That is the argument you are saying. You don't like your country, you don't like its people, and you don't trust the people to choose the people that best represent them.

We are Americans, it may take us a while, but we get it right, eventually. I believe in my country, and its people. Sorry that you don't, sad you're so unpatriotic.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-18-2011, 10:44 PM
 
12,439 posts, read 9,951,162 times
Reputation: 3129
Quote:
Originally Posted by Memphis1979 View Post
To recap, you don't trust the people of the country. The founding fathers saw fit to have slaves, and do a bunch of other horrid things. But they did one great thing, they made a government that was BEHOLDEN to voters. Now, at the time what they thought of as voters were white land owners. Not women, not black folks, not renters, not all legal citizens 18 years and older.

So, if you want to go back to that, you are probably going to meet some resistence.

But, I digress. Here we are in the real world, and the government is supposed to be beholden to the people that vote. The voting pool has expanded, but that IS the constitution

You don't think its ok for the public majority to vote for the legislators that best represent them. You think that they should have their voting choices choosen for them by the highest corporate bidder, and then you are damned if you do, and damned if you don't.

That is what you are saying, and you may not like my response, but anyone with two functioning brain cells knows what I am saying.

Give the power to the people, or they will take it back through political change. We can't continue to give loans and bail outs to banks, corporations, and millionaires while expecting everyone else to "tighten your buckles".

That is the argument you are saying. You don't like your country, you don't like its people, and you don't trust the people to choose the people that best represent them.

We are Americans, it may take us a while, but we get it right, eventually. I believe in my country, and its people. Sorry that you don't, sad you're so unpatriotic.
I don't think we are communicating very well because you seem to have forgotten what the topic of the thread was all about. I remember, because I wrote it.

You took my response out of context. Here is the whole statement "I don't trust most americans to be able to sift through all the propaganda that they are exposed to constantly by corporate advertising. That is why I am for eliminating corporate paid political ads." That is what I said.

The thread was about limiting corporate political propaganda advertisements. If corporations control all the information people receive how are people going to make an intelligent informed decision. If all things were equal, then I would trust them to make the correct decision, but when the information is not equal because only the corporations can afford to pay for political advertisements then everything is not equal.

As far as representative form of govt., I am fine with that, but that is not mob rule. Mob rule would be deciding everything based on ballot initiatives where the masses decide. That would be a pure democracy that we don't have, because the founders did not trust a pure democracy.

As far as the name calling, when you don't even understand what I am saying I will chalk that up to you drinking or something of that nature as your posts are usually reasonable.

In my view, corporations have limited free speech right. 4 out 9 supreme court justices agree with me. The conservative members of the court do not. Congress agrees with me and wrote and passed a bill to limit political adds and the supreme court found the law to be unconstitutional. This was judicial activism by the conservative members of the supreme court and not the will of the people or in accordance with the Constitution, which is why I support a constitutional amendment that OP is referring to get the will of the people into law to get around the activist conservative supreme court.

Last edited by hotair2; 11-18-2011 at 11:02 PM..
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-18-2011, 11:06 PM
 
Location: Beautiful Niagara Falls ON.
10,024 posts, read 10,133,598 times
Reputation: 8868
Citizens united is probably the worst dercision since Dread Scott. When the SCOTUS decides such important issues not by the law but by purely a partisan political stance, you know that freedom is under a severe attack.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-18-2011, 11:14 PM
 
12,439 posts, read 9,951,162 times
Reputation: 3129
Quote:
Originally Posted by lucknow View Post
Citizens united is probably the worst dercision since Dread Scott. When the SCOTUS decides such important issues not by the law but by purely a partisan political stance, you know that freedom is under a severe attack.
I completely agree. This was no more than judicial activism. This amendment being proposed could fix that. I think this bill may have some traction. It should have bipartisan support. I don't know if it will get the necessary 2/3 vote, but it has a chance.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-18-2011, 11:23 PM
 
Location: Unperson Everyman Land
28,985 posts, read 18,998,551 times
Reputation: 7763
Quote:
Originally Posted by AONE View Post
Apparently, someone in Washington is getting a clue. Now he needs to sponsor the insider trader bill that will keep Congress from profiting as they make moves that effect the price of stocks.

For too long the99% have allowed these Dbags to do anything they want as they profited personally at the expense of the people. It is time this comes to an end.

Term limits for Congress
Open donations - no hiding behind not for profit entities
limits to donations
blind trusts for their investments
end their health care and retirement benefits and make it what the people get, be it Obama care or Social Security. If they get what we get, I bet they will fix any of its problems. They should never get sweetheart programs above what the people get....EVER!



Totally agree about requiring blind trusts and prohibiting insider trading as well as the rewarding of politicians after they have left office for throwing Americans under the bus while in office.

The only issue I really have with the Congressman Duetch is the financial support he receives from Sun Capital, Inc. and others in the securities and investment industry.

Learn About Sun Capital Partners, Inc. Private Equity Firm | Sun Capital Partners, Inc.

Ted Deutch: Campaign Finance/Money - Industries - Representative 2012 | OpenSecrets


The fact that this story comes via Think Progress, a Soros front group, pegs the irony meter.


Another classic case of do as I say and not as I do.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-19-2011, 01:42 AM
 
1,337 posts, read 1,168,716 times
Reputation: 656
I'm skeptical of the ending corporate personhood claim. I wouldn't be surprised if it really had little to do with ending personhood.

Why? Because personhood is too well entrenched into the system worldwide. I don't think any politician has the balls to do it to be honest. Nor do I think they even want to... not completely, anyway. I do, however, think that politicians will sell a package which they are calling the elimination of personhood, but which in reality probably bears little resemblance to actually doing it.


Additionally, if one is to be consistent, one cannot simply revoke corporate personhood but must revoke the concept entirely, including for all organizations (non-profits, clubs, charity groups, etc...)
Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


 
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:
Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top