Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#21
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
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". |
#22
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
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. |
#23
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#24
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "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? |
#25
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "dave" wrote in message news ![]() 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. |
#26
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "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. |
#27
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
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. |
#28
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
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. |
#29
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
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. |
#30
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
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. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
FCC Diversity Chief Asked Liberal Fascists to Copy FDR, Take onLimbaugh, Murdoch, Supreme Court | Shortwave | |||
FAUX's First Amendment rights | Shortwave | |||
O/T OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE CHALLENGE TURNED DOWN BY SUPREME COURT | Shortwave | |||
Ham Takes Fight for Tower to the U.S. Supreme Court | Policy | |||
US senator backs amendment to bar gay marriage..Get rid of him | General |