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. *

First, "the wealthiest corporations" include unions,
environmentalists,
and other left-wing special interests, and there's no point in
pretending otherwise.

Second, money never left politics -- McCain-Feingold spawned
any number of workarounds, and special interests continued to
spend their money to campaign for, or against, their candidates.
Why do you think so many 501 and 527 groups sprang up in
its wake?

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.

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

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.

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.

Stevie Nichts wrote:

Y'know, I keep hearing about this boogeyman, but I've yet
to see stats to back it up.

What boogeyman and what stats? It is pretty much intuitively obvious to
the casual observer that Big Business has more money than the Unions
because a) the unions have been decreasing in strength for years and b)
most (if not all) of the money the union has comes from dues of their
*blue collar* members, by definition not the richest people in the
neighborhood.

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?)

Um, Stevie, nothing to do with doubting their existence. If you look
closely, I put it in quotes because, well, I was *quoting YOU*. Please
try not to punish someone for the -proper- use of punctuation.

have the ear of the national media to a far, FAR greater extent
than BigRichEvilKorporations.

Yes, I agree they may have the media's 'ear' but the
BigRichEvilKorporations have the MONEY -- and as we all learned from
Johnny Z. years ago, "Money talks and bull**** walks". (Quote marks used
because I am directly quoting John Z. DeLorean, late of GM).

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.

Sadly, I believe it has very little to do with free speech but has
EVERYTHING to do with getting the best politicians that money can buy.

Please answer me this:
If I recall correctly, there used to be a limit on how much of a
political contribution could be made, possibly $2500. And I seem to
further remember that occasionally, some tried to donate more than that,
got caught and was prosecuted. Please tell me how anything over $2500
used to be bad and now they can donate 25 MILLION or 125 million, the
sky is the limit. Again, everything to do with buying politicians,
damned little to do with your red herring of free speech.

Furthermore, I really was not alluding to the intelligence of the
American voters, but seeing as you read that into it, let me comment...

First, it's no secret that the American educational system has been
falling apart for years, *many* books having been written on the dumbing
of America.

Finally, the dumbing (and numbing) of the populace as alluded to in
'1984' and 'Brave New World' seems to be coming frightfully close to the
mark.

Don't forget to take your Soma pill tonight...and don't forget to read
"Hoodwinked" by John Perkins (also the author of "Confessions of an
Economic Hit Man"). The first half of his book explains much more
eloquently than I could ever hope to, the evils of the Corporatocracy.

On Jan 22, 9:30*pm, Joe from Kokomo wrote:
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.
Stevie Nichts wrote:
Y'know, I keep hearing about this boogeyman, but I've yet
to see stats to back it up.

What boogeyman and what stats? It is pretty much intuitively obvious to
the casual observer that Big Business has more money than the Unions
because a) the unions have been decreasing in strength for years

True only of non-government unions. Govenment unions, however, now
account for 51% of all union members -- and climbing.. In the midst
of
this recession, with 10% unemployment, Congress somehow managed
to pad the Federal payroll with 70,000 new hires.

I note that you seem unable to back up your claim that evil
corporations spend TONS of money. OpenSecrets is your friend.

And there's no reason to limit the discussion to unions. Corporations
are not, by definition, conservative. Trivial proof: George Soros. Or
is that different somehow?

Please answer me this:
If I recall correctly, there used to be a limit on how much of a
political contribution could be made, possibly $2500. And I seem to
further remember that occasionally, some tried to donate more than that,
got caught and was prosecuted. Please tell me how anything over $2500
used to be bad and now they can donate 25 MILLION or 125 million, the
sky is the limit. Again, everything to do with buying politicians,
damned little to do with your red herring of free speech.

We've seen how utterly ineffectual campaign-finance laws have
been -- or haven't you noticed that money somehow manages
to get spent? Limit it here, it pops up there, in the form of
PACs and 501s and 527s and other special interests -- many
of them established by Mr. Soros and his ideological comrades.
You won't get far trying to convince anyone that liberals are
somehow powerless when it comes to funding.

Me, I'll take 100% disclosure and absolute transparency over
such impotent attempts anytime. Unlike you, I have faith in
the American voter -- and my faith was restored a couple of
days ago in Massachusetts. (Oh... too soon?

As an aside, it's interesting that a liberal (or so I presume)
believes that free speech is a 'red herring.' Civil rights and
civil liberties used to be a bedrock principle of the left.
When, exactly, did that change?

On Jan 22, 9:30 pm, Joe from Kokomo wrote:
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.
Stevie Nichts wrote:
Y'know, I keep hearing about this boogeyman, but I've yet
to see stats to back it up.
What boogeyman and what stats? It is pretty much intuitively obvious to
the casual observer that Big Business has more money than the Unions
because a) the unions have been decreasing in strength for years

Stevie Nichts wrote:

True only of non-government unions. Govenment unions, however, now
account for 51% of all union members -- and climbing.

Huh? Government unions climbing?

As in starting back when Ronnie Reagan smashed, shredded and destroyed
the Air Traffic Controller's union? THOSE government unions? ROTFL!!!

As an aside, it's interesting that a liberal (or so I presume)
believes that free speech is a 'red herring.' Civil rights and
civil liberties used to be a bedrock principle of the left.
When, exactly, did that change?

Making quite a leap there, aren't you Stevie?

I referred to YOUR use of it as a red herring in THIS discussion only.
You seem to have extrapolated it to a broad, general statement. Be
careful that you don't hurt yourself making such broad leaps. ;-)

On Jan 23, 12:32*pm, Joe from Kokomo wrote:
Stevie Nichts wrote:

True only of non-government unions. Govenment unions, however, now
account for 51% of all union members -- and climbing.

Huh? Government unions climbing?

Yup. And it's 52%:
----
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...googlenews_wsj

What is newsworthy, however, is another figure reported
by the BLS: 52 percent of all union members work for the
federal or state and local governments, a sharp increase
from the 49 percent in 2008.[5] A majority of American
union members are now employed by the government;
three times more union members now work in the Post
Office than in the auto industry.[6]
----

Stevie Nichts wrote:

We've seen how utterly ineffectual campaign-finance laws have
been -- or haven't you noticed that money somehow manages
to get spent?

So?

Murder is against the law -- and yet people still commit murder. Are you
saying that just because some break the law, we should have no law? I'll
make one of your great leaps and say it looks like you are touting anarchy.

On Jan 22, 8:56*pm, wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jan 2010 13:40:35 -0800 (PST), Stevie Nichts
wrote:

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.

Even a rudely educated twit knows that Union Dues cannot match the
massive wealth of corporations

Idiot.

Ah, another liberal who only understands insults.
Okay, I'll speak Liberal, just for you: Hey, asshole!
Even a moron leftist knows that unions aren't limited
to union dues. They raise money through their 501s
and 527s, and use it to elect liberal Democrats.

Moron.

There, I've lowered myself to your level, but
if that's what it takes to speak your lingo...

On Sat, 23 Jan 2010 12:35:55 -0500, Mr.B1ack wrote:

wrote:

On Fri, 22 Jan 2010 20:14:57 -0800 (PST), Stevie Nichts
wrote:

On Jan 22, 8:56Â*pm, wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jan 2010 13:40:35 -0800 (PST), Stevie Nichts
wrote:

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.

Even a rudely educated twit knows that Union Dues cannot match the
massive wealth of corporations

Idiot.

Ah, another liberal who only understands insults. Okay, I'll speak
Liberal, just for you: Hey, asshole! Even a moron leftist knows that
unions aren't limited to union dues. They raise money through their
501s and 527s, and use it to elect liberal Democrats.

workers who give money to elect politicians are not the same as those
corporations who funnel tens of millions to elect politicians who
benefit only a small percentage of the wealth class.

And corporations are composed of WHAT exactly ? Aliens ? Robots ?
Devils ?

Nope. People.


more like ... hmm .. "rich person".
Not "real People", and more then likely not a person from America.

How about the owner of the FAUX network, who is Australian and has most
of his investments in Asia. He has allot to gain from the failure of
america. Where does the $400M for Ru$h come from when his advert sales do
not support this money?

What gets me the most is how people will believe a 30 second advert with
obvious falsehoods!
Short attention span?!

The real answer takes too much time to understand?!

Pretty sad when most of the civilized world laughs at the stupidity of
the united states when we vote in people like GW Bush or seriously
nominate someone like Pailin who obviously failed elementary school
geography. (Africa is not a country)