Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 43

Thread: Corporation files to run for Congress: important marketing strategy questions remain

  1. #1
    Slayer of the DP Newsbot
    danarhea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    39,763

    Corporation files to run for Congress: important marketing strategy questions remain

    Corporation files to run for Congress: important marketing strategy questions remain unanswered.

    Following the recent Supreme Court ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission to allow unlimited corporate funding of federal campaigns, Murray Hill Inc. today announced it is filing to run for U.S. Congress. “Until now,” Murray Hill Inc. said in a statement, “corporate interests had to rely on campaign contributions and influence-peddling to achieve their goals in Washington. But thanks to an enlightened Supreme Court, now we can eliminate the middle-man and run for office ourselves.” Murray Hill Inc. is believed to be the first “corporate person” to exercise its constitutional right to run for office.
    “The strength of America,” Murray Hill Inc. said, “is in the boardrooms, country clubs and Lear jets of America’s great corporations. We’re saying to Wal-Mart, AIG and Pfizer, if not you, who? If not now, when?” Murray Hill Inc. added: “It’s our democracy. We bought it, we paid for it, and we’re going to keep it.” Murray Hill Inc., a diversifying corporation in the Washington, D.C. area, has long held an interest in politics and sees corporate candidacy as an “emerging new market.”
    You know, I agree with the Supreme Court decision, but they are about to become the butt of a million jokes over this. At this point, I would like to ask a question, that perhaps a lawyer or 2 on this board can answer. Was it a mistake for the SCOTUS to give this ruling on free speech for artificial persons instead of the actual people who run corporations? After all, people who are officers in corporations actually exist, and have the ability to speak, thus deserving free speech. What about artificial persons? What next, will they earn the right to vote, and if so, how in the world would they be able to accomplish that task? I believe that there should be limits on what artificial persons are allowed to do. It's just common sense - The demonstration of all of this, carried to its extreme, is an artificial person running for office.

    What do you think?

    BTW, the idea for this company's marketing campaign is pure genius. LOL.

    Article is here.
    Last edited by danarhea; 01-28-10 at 04:44 PM.
    The ghost of Jack Kevorkian for President's Physician: 2016

  2. #2
    Guru

    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Last Seen
    05-13-11 @ 09:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    4,075
    Blog Entries
    3

    Re: Corporation files to run for Congress: important marketing strategy questions rem

    Quote Originally Posted by danarhea View Post
    Corporation files to run for Congress: important marketing strategy questions remain unanswered.



    You know, I agree with the Supreme Court decision, but they are about to become the butt of a million jokes over this. At this point, I would like to ask a question, that perhaps a lawyer or 2 on this board can answer. Was it a mistake for the SCOTUS to give this ruling on free speech for artificial persons instead of the actual people who run corporations? After all, people who are officers in corporations actually exist, and have the ability to speak, thus deserving free speech. What about artificial persons? What next, will they earn the right to vote, and if so, how in the world would they be able to accomplish that task? I believe that there should be limits on what artificial persons are allowed to do. It's just common sense - The demonstration of all of this, carried to its extreme, is an artificial person running for office.

    What do you think?

    BTW, the idea for this company's marketing campaign is pure genius. LOL.

    Article is here.
    I thought that the US have already elected artificial persons, one only needed to look at Pelosi last night as she bobbed up and down like an automatum!

  3. #3
    Tavern Bartender
    Constitutionalist
    American's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 10:49 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    76,323

    Re: Corporation files to run for Congress: important marketing strategy questions rem

    OMG, I guess we'll be seeing Microsoft and Exxon stickers on the back of Senate seats now.
    "He who does not think himself worth saving from poverty and ignorance by his own efforts, will hardly be thought worth the efforts of anybody else." -- Frederick Douglass, Self-Made Men (1872)
    "Fly-over" country voted, and The Donald is now POTUS.

  4. #4
    Filmmaker Lawyer Patriot
    Harshaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:23 PM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    29,607

    Re: Corporation files to run for Congress: important marketing strategy questions rem

    See what happens when people irresponsibly report what the Supreme Court decided, and those myths are perpetuated by, oh, I don't know, an irresponsible President?

    But I'm sure Murray Hill will get some play out of this.
    “Offing those rich pigs with their own forks and knives, and then eating a meal in the same room, far out! The Weathermen dig Charles Manson.”-- Bernadine Dohrn

  5. #5
    Sage
    disneydude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 12:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    25,145

    Re: Corporation files to run for Congress: important marketing strategy questions rem

    It was an incredibly stupid decision. The idea that a corporation is a person is a completely disengenous argument.

    What is hilarious is that the justices that bent and twisted every bit of logic to benefit their corporate buddies...are the same ones who always claim that the constitution is a static document and should be construed "Strictly".

    What a joke....and this is an example of why their decision is an utter joke.
    <font size=5><b>Its been several weeks since the Vegas shooting.  Its it still "Too Early" or can we start having the conversation about finally doing something about these mass shootings???​</b></font>

  6. #6
    Sage
    Dezaad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Last Seen
    06-28-15 @ 10:43 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    5,058
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Corporation files to run for Congress: important marketing strategy questions rem

    "The money powers prey upon the nation in times of peace and conspire against it in times of adversity. It is more despotic than a monarchy, more insolent than autocracy, and more selfish than bureaucracy. It denounces as public enemies, all who question its methods or throw light upon its crimes. I have two great enemies, the Southern Army in front of me and the Bankers in the rear. Of the two, the one at my rear is my greatest foe.. corporations have been enthroned and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money powers of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until the wealth is aggregated in the hands of a few, and the Republic is destroyed." Abraham Lincoln

    There is no way that the people of the United States understood Corporations to be imbued by the Constitution with the rights of the people who own them. Only activist, non-Constructionist, Judges could have found rights for Corporations.

  7. #7
    Filmmaker Lawyer Patriot
    Harshaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:23 PM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    29,607

    Re: Corporation files to run for Congress: important marketing strategy questions rem

    Quote Originally Posted by disneydude View Post
    It was an incredibly stupid decision. The idea that a corporation is a person is a completely disengenous argument.
    Here's the text of the decision.

    CITIZENS UNITED v. FEDERAL ELECTION COMM&rsquo;N

    Where is that "argument" made in the reasoning behind the decision?

    Have you even read it?


    What is hilarious is that the justices that bent and twisted every bit of logic to benefit their corporate buddies...are the same ones who always claim that the constitution is a static document and should be construed "Strictly".

    What a joke....and this is an example of why their decision is an utter joke.
    Perhaps you should cite specific key passages of the decision and explain why it's wrong. If it's truly an "utter joke," that shouldn't be hard.
    “Offing those rich pigs with their own forks and knives, and then eating a meal in the same room, far out! The Weathermen dig Charles Manson.”-- Bernadine Dohrn

  8. #8
    Filmmaker Lawyer Patriot
    Harshaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:23 PM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    29,607

    Re: Corporation files to run for Congress: important marketing strategy questions rem

    Quote Originally Posted by Dezaad View Post
    "The money powers prey upon the nation in times of peace and conspire against it in times of adversity. It is more despotic than a monarchy, more insolent than autocracy, and more selfish than bureaucracy. It denounces as public enemies, all who question its methods or throw light upon its crimes. I have two great enemies, the Southern Army in front of me and the Bankers in the rear. Of the two, the one at my rear is my greatest foe.. corporations have been enthroned and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money powers of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until the wealth is aggregated in the hands of a few, and the Republic is destroyed." Abraham Lincoln

    There is no way that the people of the United States understood Corporations to be imbued by the Constitution with the rights of the people who own them. Only activist, non-Constructionist, Judges could have found rights for Corporations.
    Where does the text of the First Amendment exclude associations of people from its protection? I can't find the part where it says "Congress shall make no law except when it comes to corporations."
    “Offing those rich pigs with their own forks and knives, and then eating a meal in the same room, far out! The Weathermen dig Charles Manson.”-- Bernadine Dohrn

  9. #9
    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: Corporation files to run for Congress: important marketing strategy questions rem

    Quote Originally Posted by Harshaw View Post
    See what happens when people irresponsibly report what the Supreme Court decided, and those myths are perpetuated by, oh, I don't know, an irresponsible President?

    But I'm sure Murray Hill will get some play out of this.
    Know what would fix all this? Cameras in the courtroom.

    If every trial was like the OJ trial, then everyone would be better informed about the law!
    People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

  10. #10
    Professor

    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    North Dakota
    Last Seen
    09-02-17 @ 08:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    2,357

    Re: Corporation files to run for Congress: important marketing strategy questions rem

    Quote Originally Posted by Harshaw View Post
    Here's the text of the decision.

    CITIZENS UNITED v. FEDERAL ELECTION COMM&rsquo;N

    Where is that "argument" made in the reasoning behind the decision?

    Have you even read it?




    Perhaps you should cite specific key passages of the decision and explain why it's wrong. If it's truly an "utter joke," that shouldn't be hard.
    Read Justice Stevens, Justice Ginsburgs, Justice Breyers, and Justice Sotomayors sections. They all partly disagreed.

    "At bottom, the Court’s opinion is thus a rejection of the common sense of the American people, who have recognized a need to prevent corporations from undermining selfgovernment since the founding, and who have fought against the distinctive corrupting potential of corporate electioneering since the days of Theodore Roosevelt. It is a strange time to repudiate that common sense. While American democracy is imperfect, few outside the majority of this Court would have thought its flaws included a dearth of corporate money in politics." - Justice Stevens

    I don't know if their decision is a "joke" because the majority of the court obviously had an appealing arguement as well. However, I am not sure it is as cut and dry as you make it to be.

Page 1 of 5 123 ... 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
  •