Page 31 of 105 FirstFirst ... 2129303132334181 ... LastLast
Results 301 to 310 of 1049

Thread: Supreme Court Overturns Limits on Corporate Spending in Political Campaigns

  1. #301
    Professor
    Cassandra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Maine
    Last Seen
    11-02-17 @ 02:39 AM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    1,319

    Re: Supreme Court eases restrictions on corporate campaign spending

    Quote Originally Posted by Ethereal View Post
    How can the Tea Party be anti-something-that-didn't-exist? That is, corporate personhood?
    Ever heard of the East India company?

    From, "Retrospect of the Boston Tea Party with a Memoir og George R.T.Hewes:

    Hewes notes: “The [East India] Company received permission to transport tea, free of all duty, from Great Britain to America…” allowing it to wipe out New England–based tea wholesalers and mom-and-pop stores and take over the tea business in all of America. “Hence,” he told his biographer, “it was no longer the small vessels of private merchants, who went to vend tea for their own account in the ports of the colonies, but, on the contrary, ships of an enormous burthen, that transported immense quantities of this commodity ... The colonies were now arrived at the decisive moment when they must cast the dye, and determine their course ... ”

    A pamphlet was circulated through the colonies called The Alarm and signed by an enigmatic “Rusticus.” One issue made clear the feelings of colonial Americans about England's largest transnational corporation and its behavior around the world:“Their Conduct in Asia, for some Years past, has given simple Proof, how little they regard the Laws of Nations, the Rights, Liberties, or Lives of Men. They have levied War, excited Rebellions, dethroned lawful Princes, and sacrificed Millions for the Sake of Gain. The Revenues of Mighty Kingdoms have entered their Coffers. And these not being sufficient to glut their Avarice, they have, by the most unparalleled Barbarities, Extortions, and Monopolies, stripped the miserable Inhabitants of their Property, and reduced whole Provinces to Indigence and Ruin. Fifteen hundred Thousands, it is said, perished by Famine in one Year, not because the Earth denied its Fruits; but [because] this Company and their Servants engulfed all the Necessaries of Life, and set them at so high a Rate that the poor could not purchase them.”

  2. #302
    Professor
    Cassandra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Maine
    Last Seen
    11-02-17 @ 02:39 AM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    1,319

    Re: Supreme Court Strikes Down Key Section of McCain-Feingold

    Quote Originally Posted by Ethereal View Post
    You didn't answer his question. You just went off on a tangent about something entirely unrelated.

    A corporation is nothing more than the legal vehicle for individuals to pool their resources and mitigate liability. At its heart, a corporation is still a group of individuals. The reasons they form this group are irrelevant to the fact that they have free speech rights.
    That definition stretches the imagination. Who is in the pool of individuals making up G.E.? The ever changing investors many of which may not be U.S. citizens? The employees?

  3. #303
    Girthless
    RightinNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Last Seen
    01-23-11 @ 11:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    25,894

    Re: Supreme Court eases restrictions on corporate campaign spending

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    Buy congressmen. What about my question, do you have an answer for it?
    How are they going to buy congressmen now that they couldn't buy before?
    People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

  4. #304
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: Supreme Court eases restrictions on corporate campaign spending

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    But this is why I say there is some legitimate claim to regulation on Congress. A corporation is not a person, hence it doesn't have rights. The People are still restricted, but we've removed the restriction on corporations. I think it needed to go the other way. I will agree that you cannot eliminate the freedom of the citizen; but that's still infringed upon even with throwing this clause out the window. The only thing we've added now is to exacerbate the current corruption and to allow possible influence from foreign agents.
    The people owning the corporation have those rights.

    The American people owning a corporation have every freedom to use their corporate money in American politics.

    The Chinese do not.

    That's the difference.

    The Congress cannot stop Americans from participating in their government.

    Sorting the two out is what Congress should focus on, not merely blanketly forbidding corporate influence.

  5. #305
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: Supreme Court Strikes Down Key Section of McCain-Feingold

    Quote Originally Posted by Cassandra View Post
    That definition stretches the imagination. Who is in the pool of individuals making up G.E.? The ever changing investors many of which may not be U.S. citizens? The employees?
    The investors, not the employees.

    Unless the employees own stock in GE.

  6. #306
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Chicago
    Last Seen
    04-02-15 @ 06:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    8,211

    Re: Supreme Court eases restrictions on corporate campaign spending

    Quote Originally Posted by LiberalAvenger View Post


    When they start putting corporations to jail and giving them death sentences then I will be for it.
    I'm not sure what you're implying here. Do you think being in a corporation gives individuals permission to break the law or something?

  7. #307
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: Supreme Court Overturns Limits on Corporate Spending in Political Campaigns

    The individuals who compose the company can use their personal money as they see fit. Corporations with corporate dollars (those don't always belong to the CEO, in fact a publicly traded company it doesn't, it's supposed to belong to the share holders) are different as a corporation itself is not an entity which has rights. As it stands, it's the individual who is restricted and the corporation which is unrestricted. It's exactly backwards.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  8. #308
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: Supreme Court eases restrictions on corporate campaign spending

    Quote Originally Posted by RightinNYC View Post
    How are they going to buy congressmen now that they couldn't buy before?
    It makes it much easier now to do so, and opens it up to influence from foreign agents. It doesn't have to be limited to Goldman Sachs, that was just used in the example. Care to answer the question I previously posted?
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  9. #309
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Chicago
    Last Seen
    04-02-15 @ 06:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    8,211

    Re: Supreme Court eases restrictions on corporate campaign spending

    Quote Originally Posted by Cassandra View Post
    Ever heard of the East India company?

    From, "Retrospect of the Boston Tea Party with a Memoir og George R.T.Hewes:

    Hewes notes: “The [East India] Company received permission to transport tea, free of all duty, from Great Britain to America…” allowing it to wipe out New England–based tea wholesalers and mom-and-pop stores and take over the tea business in all of America. “Hence,” he told his biographer, “it was no longer the small vessels of private merchants, who went to vend tea for their own account in the ports of the colonies, but, on the contrary, ships of an enormous burthen, that transported immense quantities of this commodity ... The colonies were now arrived at the decisive moment when they must cast the dye, and determine their course ... ”

    A pamphlet was circulated through the colonies called The Alarm and signed by an enigmatic “Rusticus.” One issue made clear the feelings of colonial Americans about England's largest transnational corporation and its behavior around the world:“Their Conduct in Asia, for some Years past, has given simple Proof, how little they regard the Laws of Nations, the Rights, Liberties, or Lives of Men. They have levied War, excited Rebellions, dethroned lawful Princes, and sacrificed Millions for the Sake of Gain. The Revenues of Mighty Kingdoms have entered their Coffers. And these not being sufficient to glut their Avarice, they have, by the most unparalleled Barbarities, Extortions, and Monopolies, stripped the miserable Inhabitants of their Property, and reduced whole Provinces to Indigence and Ruin. Fifteen hundred Thousands, it is said, perished by Famine in one Year, not because the Earth denied its Fruits; but [because] this Company and their Servants engulfed all the Necessaries of Life, and set them at so high a Rate that the poor could not purchase them.”
    Of course, I'm aware, but we're not talking about corporations as they were constituted at the time of the Tea Party. We're discussing corporate personhood, which is something that wasn't recognized by the American judiciary until 1886.

    Furthermore, the Tea Party was less about anti-corporate sentiment and much, much more about anti-government sentiment. Who do you think empowered the East India Company to monopolize the market?

  10. #310
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Chicago
    Last Seen
    04-02-15 @ 06:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    8,211

    Re: Supreme Court Strikes Down Key Section of McCain-Feingold

    Quote Originally Posted by Cassandra View Post
    That definition stretches the imagination. Who is in the pool of individuals making up G.E.? The ever changing investors many of which may not be U.S. citizens? The employees?
    Anyone who is materially involved with the company's finances or operations.

    And since all of them are individual people, it makes no sense why they cannot pool their resources and endorse a political candidate. You're using their business model as excuse to suppress their free speech rights.

Page 31 of 105 FirstFirst ... 2129303132334181 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •