Supreme Court reinstates First Amendment
 

Joe Irvin wrote:


Take a look at how much the Dems take from 'big corps'
http://www.opensecrets.org/industrie...y=A&cycle=2010
Bruce Jensen


Two "wrongs" do not make a "right".

Supreme Court reinstates First Amendment
 

On Jan 22, 3:43*am, jls wrote:
*

The foolish five in Scotus just legislated from the bench.

No, you don't understand:

When conservative judges make rulings intended to benefit their own
political party it's called "being a strict constitutionalist".

When liberals do the same thing, *then* it's called "legislating from
the bench".

Completely different things.

Supreme Court reinstates First Amendment
 

Supreme Court reinstates First Amendment
 

"Joe from Kokomo" wrote in message
...
bpnjensen wrote:

Well, whatever else they've [the Supreme Court] done - they have handed
the elections and
thus, the lawmaking machinery, to the wealthiest corporations in
America. Extrapolate from that what you will.

Extrapolate what I will?

OK, the end of America as we know it. A BIG win for the Corporatocracy.

Your assumption is that all corporations are either evil or do not have the
interests of people they serve. As long as there is a disclaimer of where
the money comes from there is no problem unless you think Americans are to
dumb to figure things out.

Want to know why you should worry about the Corporatocracy? Read
"Hoodwinked" by John Perkins, also the author of "Confessions of an
Economic Hit Man".

Is there assumption that corporations are evil/bad?

Supreme Court reinstates First Amendment
 

"dave" wrote in message
m...
Joe Irvin wrote:


Take a look at how much the Dems take from 'big corps'
http://www.opensecrets.org/industrie...y=A&cycle=2010
Bruce Jensen
Two "wrongs" do not make a "right".

Why is it wrong for corporations to represent their interests? As long as
their is a disclaimer where the money comes from let the voter decide ...
whats wrong with that? It seems everyone starts with the assumptions that
corporations are bad/evil.

Supreme Court reinstates First Amendment
 

"Joe from Kokomo" wrote in message
...
wrote:

ø ROTFLMAO
The worst presidents of the past 100 years
Carter
Clinton
Kennedy
FDR
Woodrow Wilson

IMHO, you are a real simpleton because you just happened to "overlook"
G.W. Bush as one of the worst presidents.

Want proof? It is generally accepted (even by Obama) that people were NOT
voting -for- Obama; rather that they were voting AGAINST Bush -- and Obama
won by a landslide. Now try again, and see if that tells you anything
about W. Bwahahahahahah

There might have been some of the votes that were anti-Bush votes, but you
must admit that Obama was very popular. To say that it was, to a large
extent, a vote for Obama was a vote against Bush is lessening Obama's real
popularity in the election. Its similar to the Dems that voted for Reagan.

In one year, Obama is the worst of them all.

Again, you seem to overlook a simple fact: Obama INHERITED not just one
but TWO expensive so-called wars with no exit strategy and INHERITED a
major Depression -- that started on Bush's watch.

Bush inherited a military that had been downsized ... the military had to be
spooled up because of the war ... remember all the complaints against Bush's
not worrying about the troops ... hummers were not properly armored etc ...
remember Rumsfeld said you go to war with what you have and not what you
wished you had.

You also must remember that Bush can only spend the money that is oked by
Congress. The economic downturned started in the last year of the Bush
administration ... Congress was taken over by the Dem in two years before
Bush's term was up. At that time the economy was purring along with an
unemployment rate of about 4.6%. True Obama has been in office only one
year, but the two previous years there was a Democratic Congress ... are
they responsible for any of the economic downturn?

Rather than picking on Obama, please realize that even if McCain won, we
would still be in exactly the same fix, maybe even worse, due to "Quitter"
Palin the Brain. No one, repeat, NO ONE, could clean up in only one year
as big of a mess as Bush left.

This is an assumption; there is no way of knowing what the outcome would
have been if McCain/Palin would have been elected ... we do know that a
whole year wouldn't have been wasted trying to fool with the US healthcare
system ... there probably wouldn't have been a cap n trade bill ... there
wouldn't have been a stimulus (pork) package of this magnitude either.

Supreme Court reinstates First Amendment
 

On Jan 22, 7:33�am, Joe from Kokomo wrote:
On Jan 22, 2:57 am, bpnjensen wrote:

Well, whatever else they've done - they have handed the elections and
thus, the lawmaking machinery, to the wealthiest corporations in
America. �
Stevie Nichts wrote:
First, "the wealthiest corporations" include unions,
environmentalists,
and other left-wing special interests, and there's no point in
pretending otherwise.

Well, yeah, you're right -- kinda, sorta.

What you overlook is the simple fact that the Big Corporations have TONS
and TONS of money, waaay more than any union or "other left-wing special
interests" could ever hope to scrape up.

Y'know, I keep hearing about this boogeyman, but I've yet
to see stats to back it up. And what YOU overlook is the
simple fact that unions and other left-wing special interests
(why the scare quotes? Do you seriously doubt they exist?)
have the ear of the national media to a far, FAR greater extent
than BigRichEvilKorporations.

And if you see no problem with letting large corporations have all that
power, IMHO you are dumber than you look.

So the choice is between Big Brother dictating how, when,
and where we can engage in political free speech versus
trusting that Americans are intelligent enough to deal with
all that free speech? Your contempt for the American voter
is palpable, possibly eclipsed by your elitism and arrogance.

Supreme Court reinstates First Amendment
 

On Jan 22, 11:56�am, bpnjensen wrote:
On Jan 22, 7:54�am, "D. Peter Maus"
wrote:

� �So, the results of this decision are from certain. The real
question is what prompted the court to take up this issue now?

Because the right suit was appealed to them and accepted by the
conservative court?

So you're okay with Obama dictating the terms of your
political speech? You don't mind being told how, when,
and where you can speak freely about candidates? How...
fascistic.

Supreme Court reinstates First Amendment
 

On Jan 22, 3:32�pm, "Joe Irvin" wrote:

Why is it wrong for corporations to represent their interests? �As long as
their is a disclaimer where the money comes from let the voter decide ...
whats wrong with that? �It seems everyone starts with the assumptions that
corporations are bad/evil.

Standard liberal fa Corporations are, by definition,
evil. Also note their breezy dismissal of unions (and
the many, many left-wing 501 and 527 groups) as
somehow powerless before the might of the Corporations.

Supreme Court reinstates First Amendment
 

On Jan 22, 12:53�pm, jls wrote:
On Jan 22, 7:32�am, Joe from Kokomo wrote:

jls wrote:
�It was never in the contemplation of the Founding Fathers or the
drafters of the post-bellum amendments to endow corporations with the
personalities of human beings.

The foolish five in Scotus just legislated from the bench.

"Foolish"? Nah, they knew EXACTLY what they were doing. I'd more go with
"sinister" or "corrupt".

I agree, James. �I'll call them the five foul fiends.

Of *course* you would. Leftists cannot conceive
that anyone could *possibly* disagree with them
for any reason other than that they're Evil Incarnate.
And then you boobs gape when a Scott Brown
turns your cozy li'l world upside down. It's fun to
watch, actually.