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 1.5 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.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-22-2010, 10:14 AM
 
11,962 posts, read 7,327,163 times
Reputation: 2772
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rggr View Post
They're still limited in what can be given to the candidates. The lies are a problem because we believe them and don't check them out. We're the ones that have allowed corporations to buy government by continuing to vote for people that allow themselves to be bought.
You are mistaken that anyone in the system as it is has a choice but to be railroaded into collusion because our election campaign process is dysfunctional. What shot has any sincere potential public servant got if an increasingly obscene dollar requirement is put upon them? NO, this isn't about free speech at all, it's about suppression of free speech so that only those paid by the highest bidder shall pass. Any candidate, left right center or indie, who dares to come up with a plan that displeases a particular industry will be dogged relentlessly with smear campaigns.

The levels of decorum in this country are already appalling. The political process gets used to abuse anyone who dares enter public life. That burden is ridiculous to impose, and shouldn't be a criteria for the job. It's disgusting watching the press bash Palins children, and I don't even like Palin. The dignity of every office is already questionable, and this just gives free license to abandon ethics. The bigger the pile of money, the worse element you will attract.

Tea Party, if you ever had a thought, you haven't got a prayer now.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-22-2010, 10:17 AM
 
19,220 posts, read 6,227,188 times
Reputation: 2337
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeepejeep View Post
Yeah, just imagine the SCOTUS actually upholding the First Amendment to The Constitution! What jerks!
The SC has just animated a thing and bestowed it rights of the living.

My dog is more organically animate than a corporate charter.

Maybe I should incorporate my dog, so it can bite Roberts on his a*s as an exercise of its First Amendment Rights.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-22-2010, 10:25 AM
 
28,461 posts, read 10,945,146 times
Reputation: 7451
Quote:
Originally Posted by harborlady View Post
You are mistaken that anyone in the system as it is has a choice but to be railroaded into collusion because our election campaign process is dysfunctional. What shot has any sincere potential public servant got if an increasingly obscene dollar requirement is put upon them? NO, this isn't about free speech at all, it's about suppression of free speech so that only those paid by the highest bidder shall pass. Any candidate, left right center or indie, who dares to come up with a plan that displeases a particular industry will be dogged relentlessly with smear campaigns.

The levels of decorum in this country are already appalling. The political process gets used to abuse anyone who dares enter public life. That burden is ridiculous to impose, and shouldn't be a criteria for the job. It's disgusting watching the press bash Palins children, and I don't even like Palin. The dignity of every office is already questionable, and this just gives free license to abandon ethics. The bigger the pile of money, the worse element you will attract.

Tea Party, if you ever had a thought, you haven't got a prayer now.
But I don't think the Supreme Court wanted to suppress free speech by way of this opinion, I think they wanted to hold Congress to a higher standard in terms of defining when and how to limit an individual's (or corporation's) influence.

While I agree with the NYT that the Supreme Court decision may have been over-reaching, and McCain may be right in characterizing the Supreme Court's understanding of corporate influence as naive, it is still not a bad thing to ask Congress to meet a higher standard.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-22-2010, 10:30 AM
 
Location: On a hill near a river
14,355 posts, read 11,768,276 times
Reputation: 5699
Quote:
Originally Posted by ergohead View Post
The SC has just animated a thing and bestowed it rights of the living.

My dog is more organically animate than a corporate charter.

Maybe I should incorporate my dog, so it can bite Roberts on his a*s as an exercise of its First Amendment Rights.
Actually they did it some time ago....

Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad - dKosopedia

And I'm sure your dog will like Justice Roberts.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-22-2010, 10:40 AM
 
19,220 posts, read 6,227,188 times
Reputation: 2337
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yeledaf View Post
Actually they did it some time ago....

Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad - dKosopedia

And I'm sure your dog will like Justice Roberts.
"In 1886, the Supreme court of the United States ruled that corporations have all of the rights of individuals, based upon the 14th amendment, which says nothing about corporations. This created the concept of corporate personhood.

Since a corporation is owned by its shareholders, are they slaveholders, and does this violate the 13th amendment?

Well, duh! I think so!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-22-2010, 10:42 AM
 
19,220 posts, read 6,227,188 times
Reputation: 2337
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yeledaf View Post
Actually they did it some time ago....

Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad - dKosopedia

And I'm sure your dog will like Justice Roberts.
Yes - my dog has always been obedient to his steakholders.

Last edited by ergohead; 01-22-2010 at 10:55 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-22-2010, 10:43 AM
 
28,461 posts, read 10,945,146 times
Reputation: 7451
Quote:
Originally Posted by ergohead View Post
"In 1886, the Supreme court of the United States ruled that corporations have all of the rights of individuals, based upon the 14th amendment, which says nothing about corporations. This created the concept of corporate personhood.

Since a corporation is owned by its shareholders, are they slaveholders, and does this violate the 13th amendment?

Well, duh! I think so!
Sorry, but I missed the part where you explained why you think so.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-22-2010, 10:56 AM
 
19,220 posts, read 6,227,188 times
Reputation: 2337
Quote:
Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge View Post
Sorry, but I missed the part where you explained why you think so.
Prima Facie?

Or, do you want in-depth analysis?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-22-2010, 10:57 AM
 
28,461 posts, read 10,945,146 times
Reputation: 7451
Quote:
Originally Posted by ergohead View Post
Prima Facie?

Or, do you want in-depth analysis?
A logical explanation will do.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-22-2010, 11:12 AM
 
19,220 posts, read 6,227,188 times
Reputation: 2337
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yeledaf View Post
Actually they did it some time ago....

Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad - dKosopedia

And I'm sure your dog will like Justice Roberts.
This is nothing more than what is commonly known as the Corporate Sex Act.

It allows Corporations or other "Persons" to procreate births of immortals.

Sorta like the immortality that Christian Crazies have always pursued, but not exactly in the same venue.

If persons created the Constitution, why shouldn't the Constitution create persons?

I'm sure Justice Roberts would state simply that, "The worm has turned".

"Now, the slaves own the plantation!"

FREEDOM AT LAST!
Reply With Quote 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.


Reply
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 $84,000 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

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2014, 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 - Top