Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-24-2016, 02:38 PM
 
79,907 posts, read 44,199,011 times
Reputation: 17209

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by whogo View Post
Let's just be honest here and agree that the Constitution, properly interpreted, is a great barrier to the left's agenda.
Bush signed the law that was overturned.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-24-2016, 02:47 PM
 
Location: Houston
26,979 posts, read 15,886,908 times
Reputation: 11259
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp View Post
Bush signed the law that was overturned.
Yes, he did. Bush was no real conservative. He also expanded Medicare.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-24-2016, 04:01 PM
 
79,907 posts, read 44,199,011 times
Reputation: 17209
Quote:
Originally Posted by whogo View Post
Yes, he did. Bush was no real conservative. He also expanded Medicare.
And was re-elected. The complaints ring hollow.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-24-2016, 05:58 PM
 
33,016 posts, read 27,455,098 times
Reputation: 9074
Quote:
Originally Posted by whogo View Post
Actually their purpose is to increase shareholder wealth and everyone should be aware of that. If demand is for the crap we get today that is what we get.

What if the demand for crap is driven by government prohibition of what people really want?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-24-2016, 06:05 PM
 
33,016 posts, read 27,455,098 times
Reputation: 9074
Quote:
Originally Posted by whogo View Post
Let's just be honest here and agree that the Constitution, properly interpreted, is a great barrier to the left's agenda.

The Constitution that was imposed on the landless without their input or consent?

The Constitution which leaves property rights in the hands of government, which explains why the landless have impaired property rights?

THAT Constitution?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-25-2016, 04:37 AM
 
28,164 posts, read 25,305,403 times
Reputation: 16665
Quote:
Originally Posted by workingclasshero View Post
ok

yet you do understand that OPINIONS and VIEWS are bought with donations

when a PERSON, or a GROUP OF PERSONS (corporation) want something from the government 'e a "law'" or "policy" they have to pay for the airtime or presentation

when moveon.org want to influence the liberal policy makers, what do you think they are doing

when the teachers union, wishes to present their wishes to the government for policy making do you think its just a letter of petition?? do you think those petitions cost nothing?


every year, (even before CU) newspapers and other organizations (corporations) would ENDORSE, and even take out full page adds, either for or against a candidate, for or against a policy bill

that's called freedom of speech and freedom of the press(a corporation)

all CU did was verify that the 1st amendment was for ALL (to include unions, organizations (profit or non-profit) , corporations, and individuals


to stifle freedom of expression or speech (and yes money buys you the speech) would be a violation of the 1st amendment and the path towards a dictatorship
But the problem is that big groups of people have perverted the process. Instead of just paying to have their message heard, they are shelling big bucks out to their candidates which, in turn, gives those groups power over the government.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-25-2016, 04:39 AM
 
28,164 posts, read 25,305,403 times
Reputation: 16665
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimj View Post
Bernie was/is NOT genuine or he wouldn't have tossed his hat in with Hillary, ESPECIALLY once he found out for a FACT that what he believed was true, Hillary's coronation was RIGGED.

A genuine person who actually and honestly believes in his positions would not suck up to and buddy up with someone who violates most everything that person believes in.
A person who cares more about his country than himself would...

especially considering the alternative.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-25-2016, 04:44 AM
 
28,164 posts, read 25,305,403 times
Reputation: 16665
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp View Post
It does and thanks and sorry.

As you note.....ads change no ones minds.

So all they do is spread the wealth around.....that is not a bad thing.
But if ads do nothing why spend money on them? Why disagree with capping spending on campaigns? I think there are many, many qualified, intelligent Americans who would have been better candidates than what we have but they can't compete against the likes of Trump and Clinton - and its because of money. Don't you find that frustrating and totally not in keeping with what America is supposed to be about?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-25-2016, 04:46 AM
 
28,164 posts, read 25,305,403 times
Reputation: 16665
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp View Post
Nothing in the law that was overturned did anything about corporations giving money to the parties. This is what they are after. They want all the money funneled through them. They want to completely control the message. They want no one outside of the parties to have a say.

That is what the act did. It did nothing to stop corporations from influencing anyone with money.
From everything I've read and seen, it was an unintended consequence of the law which made it easier for corporations to give money to parties. As you say, even outside of that, CU does a lot of damage to the democratic process allowing "people" (groups) to control a whole party's message and not allowing others to have a say in what happens.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-25-2016, 04:48 AM
 
28,164 posts, read 25,305,403 times
Reputation: 16665
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp View Post
When we get a bill that would do that, let us know. You want to create a law that would ban anything above say $250 to be donated to the parties? I'm not sure that would stand Constitutional muster but I'd not fight it.

We will never see that.
I'd LOVE to see something like that. How do you think it would be challenged on a Constitutional level? (Genuinely interested)
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 $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

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:53 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top