Page 88 of 105 FirstFirst ... 3878868788899098 ... LastLast
Results 871 to 880 of 1049

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

  1. #871
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Seen
    05-16-15 @ 02:32 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,537

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

    that's nice

    obama's a transparent phony

    his entire agenda is dead

  2. #872
    Bus Driver to Hell
    Thorgasm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:12 PM
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    68,194

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

    Quote Originally Posted by The Prof View Post
    that's nice

    obama's a transparent phony

    his entire agenda is dead
    What will you guys talk about now?
    Quote Originally Posted by faithful_servant View Post
    Being a psychiatric patient does not mean that you are mentally ill.



  3. #873
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Seen
    05-16-15 @ 02:32 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,537

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

    stay tuned and find out

  4. #874
    Professor
    other's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    VA
    Last Seen
    01-22-14 @ 11:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    1,473

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Cassandra View Post
    Any data on that?.
    Well, do you believe that all advertising campaigns are 100% effective 100% of the time?

    I see no reason why anyone would need to be provided data to realize that sometimes advertisements fail or backfire. Do you buy everything you see on every commercial you see on TV?

    Quote Originally Posted by Cassandra View Post
    Sorry, I fail to see how defining the rights delineated in the constitution as meant for people not corporations cedes power to Washington. I would say that it helps to cede power to citizens.
    In the case of the 1st amendment, allowing the government to decide through legislation who or what the right applies to is ceding power to the government.... the amendment states "shall make no law." No exceptions are included and the amendment has not been repealed.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cassandra View Post
    Hmm, I think that many of our elected officials are extremely unhappy with a situation that forces them to spend two days out of every work week raising money rather than doing the people's business. Judging from the Abramoff scandal there are certainly people whose minds are twisted by the flow of money. NOt all, though.
    It doesn't take all of them to churn out crappy and/or unconstitutional policy... just some.
    Last edited by other; 02-01-10 at 12:45 AM.

  5. #875
    Sage

    Donc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    out yonder
    Last Seen
    12-06-17 @ 09:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    9,426

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

    Quote Originally Posted by The Prof View Post
    stay tuned and find out
    Hey man what did you do to the prof?If that was the prof it would have read like this.

    stay

    tuned

    and

    find

    out
    The haggardness of poverty is everywhere seen contrasted with the sleekness of wealth, the exhorted labor of some compensating for the idleness of others, wretched hovels by the side of stately colonnades, the rags of indigence blended with the ensigns of opulence; in a word, the most useless profusion in the midst of the most urgent wants.Jean-Baptiste Say

  6. #876
    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 Overturns Limits on Corporate Spending in Political Campaigns

    Quote Originally Posted by Cassandra View Post
    Do you believe that what you have to say right here, is not watched? I would say that this is not really the topic at hand but just wondering?...
    Do you honestly thing that someone is reading what is being written here? A government spider searching for particular terrorism-related topics I can buy, but an actual person? Not a chance.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cassandra View Post
    The only races on which corporations are going to spend money are the few that are relevant to their interests.
    And how does that distinguish them from unions?

    I have not argued that there are more ways, than one, to corrupt the system. First, you gerrymander the districts so that most are "safe". Then you allow media consolidation so that diversity of speech is limited and then you -the corporation- can narrow the field further, to the very few elections/issues that might be worth influencing. Hey, the proof is easily recognizable in the total abdication the administration & dems have shown towards the special interests in the H.C. legislation.
    Which has what to do with what we're talking about?
    People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

  7. #877
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    virginia
    Last Seen
    04-01-13 @ 03:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    16,881
    Blog Entries
    19

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Cassandra View Post
    Any data on that?


    Sorry, I fail to see how defining the rights delineated in the constitution as meant for people not corporations cedes power to Washington. I would say that it helps to cede power to citizens.

    Hmm, I think that many of our elected officials are extremely unhappy with a situation that forces them to spend two days out of every work week raising money rather than doing the people's business. Judging from the Abramoff scandal there are certainly people whose minds are twisted by the flow of money. NOt all, though.

    But in general, meaningful changes have to come from the bottom up. There is every reason why libertarians and progressives should make common cause to work toward financial/electoral changes that would break the back of the two party system.
    I don;t know much about the constitution but I am already learning a lot from you.

    But, would not breaking the backs of the two party system be anarchy? I mean they are our elected leaders.

    I am trying to learn.

  8. #878
    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 Overturns Limits on Corporate Spending in Political Campaigns

    Quote Originally Posted by RightinNYC View Post


    And how does that distinguish them from unions?
    Take a step back- the repub talking point is that corporate spending would be balanced by union spending. Their phrase, not mine. While it is true that corporations have the resources to out spend any other group, including unions, it is a pretty hollow argument. What is really lost is the speech of all the millions who are not represented by any well- off interest group. Often corporations and unions are congenial partners on issues and candidates. Need I list some?

    But frankly, as I have said, it strikes me as insane to design a system in which no one can run for office w/o raising hundreds of thousands of dollars and, once in office, we pay these reps to spend 30% of their time raising more money.

    And , obviously, I adamantly disagree that corporations are people. I have not seen any convincing arguments that the framers intended for corporations to be considered people and plenty of historical evidence that they could not have. So, I guess we will just have to agree to disagree.

  9. #879
    Sage
    misterman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Last Seen
    02-09-12 @ 08:41 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,913

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Cassandra View Post
    Take a step back- the repub talking point is that corporate spending would be balanced by union spending. Their phrase, not mine.
    I'm not Republican! I consider that an insult!

    Seriously, as a fellow liberal, maybe you can trust me a little more on this issue.

    While it is true that corporations have the resources to out spend any other group, including unions, it is a pretty hollow argument. What is really lost is the speech of all the millions who are not represented by any well- off interest group. Often corporations and unions are congenial partners on issues and candidates. Need I list some?
    Everything you say is predicated on the assumption that the voters are idiots who just vote for whoever throws more ads at them. Or if they are (maybe), that you should be designated to protect them from their idiocy. Why you?

    But frankly, as I have said, it strikes me as insane to design a system in which no one can run for office w/o raising hundreds of thousands of dollars and, once in office, we pay these reps to spend 30% of their time raising more money.
    I agree wholeheartedly. But the solution isn't to ration speech.

    And , obviously, I adamantly disagree that corporations are people. I have not seen any convincing arguments that the framers intended for corporations to be considered people and plenty of historical evidence that they could not have. So, I guess we will just have to agree to disagree.
    That doesn't matter. The First Amendment protects speech, regardless of its source.

  10. #880
    Professor Charles Martel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Seen
    03-21-10 @ 08:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    1,668

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Cassandra View Post
    Take a step back- the repub talking point is that corporate spending would be balanced by union spending. Their phrase, not mine. While it is true that corporations have the resources to out spend any other group, including unions, it is a pretty hollow argument. What is really lost is the speech of all the millions who are not represented by any well- off interest group. Often corporations and unions are congenial partners on issues and candidates. Need I list some?
    Once again...after the trillion dollar bonanza by Obama, where such voices above were absolutely silent, we just now hear concerns from the Left on the "lost free speech of millions who aren't represented by special interests." Hey, welcome to the party, Cassandra! Many of us felt powerless during Obama's campaign, your party uninterested even in foreign monies and Soros stuffed bags of cash. Amusing how this SC decision jolts you awake, special interests and unions and ACORNS and community organizers and billionaires have been dominating the Democrat political machines...without a peep of representation for me.

    And you are correct, corporations have money. And hopefully, it's pouring into Repub coffers right now. We need to win these elections in 2010 and then go right after the Presidency in 2012.

    But frankly, as I have said, it strikes me as insane to design a system in which no one can run for office w/o raising hundreds of thousands of dollars and, once in office, we pay these reps to spend 30% of their time raising more money.
    Struck insane but gleeful as a schoolgirl on Obama election night is my guess.

    And , obviously, I adamantly disagree that corporations are people.
    Of course you do.

    I have not seen any convincing arguments that the framers intended for corporations to be considered people and plenty of historical evidence that they could not have. So, I guess we will just have to agree to disagree.
    Oh...we want to use the Framers now as well......for the love of God! The Framers didn't restrict people from incorporating nor gave the government any power to set rules on such freedom of speech. Should I wish to become political....why should the fact that I own, invest in, or manage a corporation make a slime's bit of difference? Why, because I have more money? Because a corporation has bucks, that's the reason to deny them their right to free speech or to contribute to a candidate??

    Republicans...buckle up. This decision is landmark and should send a shiver down Obama's spine, we're gonna parachute money into Republican campaigns. It's on....
    Last edited by Charles Martel; 02-01-10 at 10:01 AM.
    It was the Austrasians, that hewed on bravely through the thick of the fight, it was they who found and cut down the Saracen King.

Page 88 of 105 FirstFirst ... 3878868788899098 ... 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
  •