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.
Sorry it took so long to respond. Why try to prove you wrong? Because while you put up an excellent argument, nevertheless I believe you are wrong.
I go back to the war on drugs--we have regulated, restricted out the wazoo, yet still drugs are widely available. The war on drugs has not acheived the intended results of stopping the flow--not even close.
Regarding your comparison to murder, there is a key distinction between murder and either campaign or drug violations. Murder is malum in se i.e. wrong in itself, and thus prohibited. Drugs & campaign violations are prohibitum malum, i.e. wrong simply because they are prohibited.
When something is prohibitum malum it is inherently tough to enforce, and invariably loopholes will be found and/or black markets arise. We see this time and time again, whether with drugs, booze, prostitution, gambling, etc. But there is really not much of a black market for 'murder for hire' (pulp novels notwithstanding) because it is malum in se and thus much more readily enforceable.
Again, as long as government is so big, powerful, and has 4 of every 10 dollars flowing thru its hands, people are going to find ways to access it and direct some of that money flow into their pockets. The solution is not to regulate & restrict the buying & selling of influence. The solution is to eliminate the influence in the first place by radically reducing the size and scope of government.
Good answer, but I am going to paraphrase your argument. Where there is no victim such as prostitution why try to regulate it. I agree. However, there are victims when congress is purchased by the lobbyist and special interests groups control policy. We the american people are victims. Our country as a whole are victims because we are not willing participants in this arrangement and we don't approve.
I always wondered what would happen to Medicare and the corporations that are tightly connected to them would do... or perhaps Food Stamp programs who are tightly affiliated with Mega Grocery stores... I mean, I didn't realize that Democrats want to threaten those lobbyists... like Amtrak, postal service, public unions, AARP, etc etc... oh wait a minute, that's right... they want those ones to continue... selective banning, huh? Full of you know what... its all about increasing the Democrats power and weakening their opponents... I don't buy that BS for one second... The Republicans even the game and Democrats must really suck that they can't play fair... well, they like to steal... why wouldn't they like to cheat...
I always wondered what would happen to Medicare and the corporations that are tightly connected to them would do... or perhaps Food Stamp programs who are tightly affiliated with Mega Grocery stores... I mean, I didn't realize that Democrats want to threaten those lobbyists... like Amtrak, postal service, public unions, AARP, etc etc... oh wait a minute, that's right... they want those ones to continue... selective banning, huh? Full of you know what... its all about increasing the Democrats power and weakening their opponents... I don't buy that BS for one second... The Republicans even the game and Democrats must really suck that they can't play fair... well, they like to steal... why wouldn't they like to cheat...
Divide and conquer seems to be working on you. Democrats and republicans voted for the bill. The supreme court found it unconstitutional. It is a bipartisan issue.
In one of the greatest signs yet that the 99 Percenters are having an impact, Rep. Ted Deutch (D-FL), a member of the House Judiciary Committee, today introduced an amendment that would ban corporate money in politics and end corporate personhood once and for all.
Deutch’s amendment, called the Outlawing Corporate Cash Undermining the Public Interest in our Elections and Democracy (OCCUPIED) Amendment, would overturn the Citizens United decision, re-establishing the right of Congress and the states to regulate campaign finance laws, and to effectively outlaw the ability of for-profit corporations to contribute to campaign spending.
“No matter how long protesters camp out across America, big banks will continue to pour money into shadow groups promoting candidates more likely to slash Medicaid for poor children than help families facing foreclosure,” said Deutch in a statement provided to ThinkProgress. “No matter how strongly Ohio families fight for basic fairness for workers, the Koch Brothers will continue to pour millions into campaigns aimed at protecting the wealthiest 1%.
No matter how fed up seniors in South Florida are with an agenda that puts oil subsidies ahead of Social Security and Medicare, corporations will continue to fund massive publicity campaigns and malicious attack ads against the public interest. Americans of all stripes agree that for far too long, corporations have occupied Washington and drowned out the voices of the people. I introduced the OCCUPIED Amendment because the days of corporate control of our democracy. It is time to return the nation’s capital and our democracy to the people.”
Amen! Someone just passed this to me through occupy sites. Looks like you beat me to it.
Getmoneyout.com has gone past the 1/4 million mark in signatures. It's all saying the same thing. This is a tumor creating the cesspool in DC that needs excise.
... well, they like to steal... why wouldn't they like to cheat...
What stealing and cheating is necessary when legally schlurping under the finance lobbyist desk is the only job requirement that counts anymore? Does that represent you? It doesn't represent me. Who and what does it represent?
I have little tolerance for Olbermans vitriol, however, when he was screaming his head off how politicians were reduced to being a bunch of wh*res, he was sadly correct. Time to hose the place down. The terms and conditions of political employment are long overdue for change. Checks and balances are in need of restoration. I note that conservatives who ought to be in favor of it are reliably the sponsors of it's utter destruction. That's how I knew they were no longer the party they claimed to be.
The lack of confidence Americans (across the poli spectrum) have in the entire legislative body should be apparent enough. THIS is a 99% issue.
It was bipartisan--barely. Conservative Republicans overwhelmingly opposed it (on First Amendment grounds (as did the ACLU, btw)). In the Senate it passed 59-41. Only three Democrats voted no, and only 12 R's voted yes--all from the moderate/liberal wing (Specter, Snowe, Collins, Chafee, etc).
About.com: U.S. Senate: Legislation & Records Home > Votes > Roll Call Vote
Well I never said that it had all Republican support. I said bipartisan, which means Republican and Democrat. We don't have to worry about 1st amendment if we add another amendment. Your link does specifically says that some Republicans voted for it.
Then how dare them write a constitution that gave the public so much power.
You hate your country, good to know.
They thought they were giving power to the public, when in fact, they were giving it to politicians at a lower level, while still defining "public" as they saw appropriate. They wanted to appease the "public" while protecting the interests of the wealthy (from who else, but the public).
Having said that, freedom of speech isn't quite free. Not to you, not to me, and should not be to them (corporations). A corporation was expected to be governed under well defined rules then. Was it ever meant for them to get away with lies?
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 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.
