| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Country
1000+ Penny Miser Member
USA
3121 Posts |
 Posted - 01/22/2010 : 15:11:46
|
Of, By, and For the Corporation. The recent Supreme Court ruling legitimizes the outright sale of politicians to the highest corporate bidder. It is the end of whatever vestiges of democracy we have left. It will be unlimited power brokered by bought politicians for those with BIG money. This decision is bad for all American citizens no matter what is your political persuasion.
Fred Wertheimer, a longtime advocate of McCain-Feingold, called today’s ruling “the most radical and destructive campaign finance decision in Supreme Court history” and said the court’s majority had “abandoned longstanding judicial principles, judicial precedents and judicial restraint.”
You must be logged in to see this link.
|
---> Come to the new and improved realcent: http://realcent.org
The things that will destroy America are prosperity-at-any-price, peace-at-any-price, safety-first instead of duty-first, the love of soft living, and the get-rich-quick theory of life.
– Theodore Roosevelt
|
|
|
El Dee
Penny Hoarding Member
USA
547 Posts |
Posted - 01/22/2010 : 15:18:54
|
Y'mean like George Soros in the last election?
Yawn.
|
Trust the government? Ask an Indian. |
 |
|
|
kirkland
New Member
USA
0 Posts |
Posted - 01/22/2010 : 15:26:02
|
| McCain-Feingold was an absurd piece of legislation that should never have been there in the first place. |
|
|
|
Country
1000+ Penny Miser Member
USA
3121 Posts |
Posted - 01/22/2010 : 15:26:11
|
quote:
Originally posted by El Dee
Y'mean like George Soros in the last election?
Yawn.
This is way beyond the view that you are taking. It goes way beyond whether a Democrat or Republican gets elected. (I don't give a crap about Soros anyway.) It's about the final downfall of American democracy. Nothing to yawn about!! Wake up!!
Could a second American Revolution be too far off? |
---> Come to the new and improved realcent: http://realcent.org
The things that will destroy America are prosperity-at-any-price, peace-at-any-price, safety-first instead of duty-first, the love of soft living, and the get-rich-quick theory of life.
– Theodore Roosevelt
|
Edited by - Country on 01/22/2010 15:28:46 |
|
|
|
Country
1000+ Penny Miser Member
USA
3121 Posts |
Posted - 01/22/2010 : 15:30:13
|
quote:
Originally posted by kirkland
McCain-Feingold was an absurd piece of legislation that should never have been there in the first place.
Who cares? What do you think about this Supreme Court decision? |
---> Come to the new and improved realcent: http://realcent.org
The things that will destroy America are prosperity-at-any-price, peace-at-any-price, safety-first instead of duty-first, the love of soft living, and the get-rich-quick theory of life.
– Theodore Roosevelt
|
|
|
|
JobIII
1000+ Penny Miser Member
USA
1507 Posts |
Posted - 01/22/2010 : 15:34:36
|
| Welcome back special interest groups, with interest! |
Selling Copper cents. $0 FV available at 1.4xFV. Also interested in trading for wheat pennies and other coins Please pm me for requests or inquiries.
|
|
|
|
JobIII
1000+ Penny Miser Member
USA
1507 Posts |
Posted - 01/22/2010 : 15:35:49
|
| it's amazing that this was so close a decision, considering that really no seat of going to be free of this impurity. |
Selling Copper cents. $0 FV available at 1.4xFV. Also interested in trading for wheat pennies and other coins Please pm me for requests or inquiries.
|
|
|
|
kirkland
New Member
USA
0 Posts |
Posted - 01/22/2010 : 15:38:33
|
| I'm certainly glad that it happened the way it did. How about you? |
|
|
|
Kurr
1000+ Penny Miser Member
2906 Posts |
Posted - 01/22/2010 : 15:52:36
|
Worse that just special interest groups. Cities and Counties are corporations. The fed.gov is a corporation. Corporate Hedge Funds.
How about foreign corps? Like Russia's Gazprom, or a National China Corporation.
The problem is the 14th where they said that corps were "Persons" under the law. A corporation is a legal entity only. The supreme court ruling is based upon first amendment rights rulings and the fact that the court see's corps as "persons".
So with this ruling, can a corp with federally protected right of free speech vote? Voting is a form of speech as seen in previous rulings. How about running for office, is that a right corporations have as well? Senator microsoft? President Carlyle? Could the incororated city of Indianapolis run for the Governor of Indiana?
I believe the majority should be horse whipped in this ruling. America has just been put on the Open, International Market. |
The silver [is] mine, and the gold [is] mine, saith the LORD of hosts. Hag 2:8 [/b]
He created it. He controls it. He gave it to us for His use. Why did we turn from sound scriptural currency that PROTECTS us?
KJV Bible w/ Strong's Concordance: http://www.blueletterbible.org/
The book of The Hundreds: http://www.land.netonecom.net/tlp/ref/boh/bookOfTheHundreds_v4.1.pdf
The Two Republics: http://www.whitehorsemedia.com/docs/THE_TWO_REPUBLICS.pdf
Good reading: http://ecclesia.org/truth/government.html
A number of people are educated beyond, sometimes way beyond, their intelligence. - Tenbears
|
|
|
|
JobIII
1000+ Penny Miser Member
USA
1507 Posts |
Posted - 01/22/2010 : 16:19:52
|
| Right now there's a lot of speculation about the horrors that may come. I don't doubt that 2010 elections may carry questions about this ruling influencing their outcomes. |
Selling Copper cents. $0 FV available at 1.4xFV. Also interested in trading for wheat pennies and other coins Please pm me for requests or inquiries.
|
|
|
|
theo
Penny Hoarding Member
USA
588 Posts |
Posted - 01/22/2010 : 20:34:52
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kurr
Worse that just special interest groups. Cities and Counties are corporations. The fed.gov is a corporation. Corporate Hedge Funds.
How about foreign corps? Like Russia's Gazprom, or a National China Corporation.
The problem is the 14th where they said that corps were "Persons" under the law. A corporation is a legal entity only. The supreme court ruling is based upon first amendment rights rulings and the fact that the court see's corps as "persons".
So with this ruling, can a corp with federally protected right of free speech vote? Voting is a form of speech as seen in previous rulings. How about running for office, is that a right corporations have as well? Senator microsoft? President Carlyle? Could the incororated city of Indianapolis run for the Governor of Indiana?
I believe the majority should be horse whipped in this ruling. America has just been put on the Open, International Market.
You're acting a corporation is some faceless, lifeless entity, when it is nothing more than a group of people organized for the purpose of making a profit. The 1st Amendment extends free political speech to groups of people as well as individuals. It is perfectly legal for people to form advocacy groups and buy air time during an election. All the Supreme court was saying is that a corporation is just another one of these groups.
During the 2008 Presidential election campaign the two candidates combined to raise well over a billion dollars. Much of this money came from corporations (albeit indirectly through other groups). I think the only difference now will be that the commercials will be clearly funded by the insurance industry or the oil industry and not some mysterious group called "People for a better world."
|
|
|
|
Kurr
1000+ Penny Miser Member
2906 Posts |
Posted - 01/22/2010 : 21:56:09
|
A corporation is a lifeless entity. It is a legal fiction that owes no alegiance to country nor person, nor group, nor anything thing other than profit. The only thing it is beholden to at all is the shareholders and only because legally required to. A "corporation" will cut off it's own head (ceo) or any part of itself to preserve profits. It will pressure markets, collapse economies, and starve or kill millions in the name of profits and destroy any that dare stop it. Our forefathers and the founders of this nation warned us of the dangers of unchecked corporations.
Now on this next part, yes, the companies did donate tremendous sums of money to these fellows. And it seems to have paid off for them. GM is not for America, GM is for GM. AIG aint for America, AIG is for AIG.
Now we have to be subjected to their drowning out the peoples choice for representation for their over hyped, pre-programmed, scripted, candidate/whore and since it's the "big boy corporations" that will be winning it, probably will be doing it with taxpayer money that 90% of the people said they didn't want given to the corporations, by the guys they bought last time, for the guys they buy next time to screw you even harder, steal more of your wealth to bankers, and further devalue your savings through the mass printing of money, destroying or transfering what little we have left, including our national soveriegnty.
Your really ok with all that? |
The silver [is] mine, and the gold [is] mine, saith the LORD of hosts. Hag 2:8 [/b]
He created it. He controls it. He gave it to us for His use. Why did we turn from sound scriptural currency that PROTECTS us?
KJV Bible w/ Strong's Concordance: http://www.blueletterbible.org/
The book of The Hundreds: http://www.land.netonecom.net/tlp/ref/boh/bookOfTheHundreds_v4.1.pdf
The Two Republics: http://www.whitehorsemedia.com/docs/THE_TWO_REPUBLICS.pdf
Good reading: http://ecclesia.org/truth/government.html
A number of people are educated beyond, sometimes way beyond, their intelligence. - Tenbears
|
Edited by - Kurr on 01/22/2010 22:14:35 |
|
|
|
theo
Penny Hoarding Member
USA
588 Posts |
Posted - 01/23/2010 : 00:12:12
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kurr
A corporation is a lifeless entity. It is a legal fiction that owes no alegiance to country nor person, nor group, nor anything thing other than profit. The only thing it is beholden to at all is the shareholders and only because legally required to. A "corporation" will cut off it's own head (ceo) or any part of itself to preserve profits. It will pressure markets, collapse economies, and starve or kill millions in the name of profits and destroy any that dare stop it. Our forefathers and the founders of this nation warned us of the dangers of unchecked corporations.
Now on this next part, yes, the companies did donate tremendous sums of money to these fellows. And it seems to have paid off for them. GM is not for America, GM is for GM. AIG aint for America, AIG is for AIG.
Now we have to be subjected to their drowning out the peoples choice for representation for their over hyped, pre-programmed, scripted, candidate/whore and since it's the "big boy corporations" that will be winning it, probably will be doing it with taxpayer money that 90% of the people said they didn't want given to the corporations, by the guys they bought last time, for the guys they buy next time to screw you even harder, steal more of your wealth to bankers, and further devalue your savings through the mass printing of money, destroying or transfering what little we have left, including our national soveriegnty.
Your really ok with all that?
"A corporation is a lifeless entity. It is a legal fiction that owes no alegiance to country nor person, nor group, nor anything thing other than profit."
But these corporations are populated, run and owned by people who do have allegences to family, community and country. Profits and patriotism are not mutually exclusive. In fact profits are patriotic in that they create tax revenue.
"It will pressure markets, collapse economies, and starve or kill millions in the name of profits and destroy any that dare stop it."
That's a pretty extreme statement. I can't think of any corporation that is in a position to kill on this scale. I can think of several governments that can do this (and many more that have).
I agree that any unchecked entity, be it a corporation or government, poses a danger to our freedoms. Having said that I believe, that as a rule, most corporations are far more accoutable than the government precisely because they must make a profit to survive. Our elected officials only need our vote every 2, 4 and 6 years, whereas a corporation needs our "dollar votes" every day.
Our government (which you don't too seem concerned about) tried to force nationalized healthcare on us despite consistent negative polling. Most corporations that go against the will of their consumers will be driven into bankrupcty within months.
However, two exceptions are AIG which, due to its horrific risk management, should have been allowed to fail; and Goldman Sachs which appears to have used its connections (former executives) in the Government to gain an unfair advantage over its competition. There will be even more situations like this as the Government gets more involved in the economy and begins to choose which businesses prosper and which don't.
". . .steal more of your wealth to bankers, and further devalue your savings through the mass printing of money, destroying or transfering what little we have left, including our national soveriegnty."
You should understand that much of the wealth that would be stolen will be from private corporations. If the dollar collapses, 99% of corporations (including large ones) will be in the same boat we are.
|
"Hobbies? I got no hobbies! Everything I do; I do for real." The Gold Coast |
Edited by - theo on 01/23/2010 00:22:43 |
|
|
|
Kurr
1000+ Penny Miser Member
2906 Posts |
Posted - 01/23/2010 : 09:45:30
|
"A corporation is a lifeless entity. It is a legal fiction that owes no alegiance to country nor person, nor group, nor anything thing other than profit."
You must be logged in to see this link.
AFTER TWENTY-THREE years advising large corporations on securities offerings, mergers and acquisitions, I left my position because I was disturbed by the game. I realized that the many social ills created by corporations stem directly from corporate law. It dawned on me that the law, in its current form, actually inhibits executives and corporations from being socially responsible. So in June 2000 I decided to devote the next phase of my life to making people aware of this problem. My goal is to build consensus to change the law so that it encourages good corporate citizenship rather than inhibiting it.
The provision in the law I am talking about is the one that says that the purpose of the corporation is simply to make money for shareholders. Distilled to its essence, it says that the people who run corporations have a legal duty to shareholders, and that duty is to make money. Failing this duty can leave directors and officers open to being sued by shareholders. This explains why corporations find social issues such as human rights irrelevant - because they fall outside the corporation's legal mandate. Secondly, these provisions explain why executives behave differently than they might as individual citizens, because the law says their only obligation in business is to make money.
This design has the unfortunate side effect of largely eliminating personal responsibility. Directors and officers know that their jobs, salaries, bonuses and stock options depend on delivering profits for shareholders. Companies believe that their duty to the public interest consists in complying with the law. Obeying the law is simply a cost. Since it interferes with making money, it must be minimized - using devices like lobbying, legal hair-splitting and jurisdiction shopping.
Directors and officers give little thought to the fact that these activities may damage the public interest. Lower-level employees know that their livelihoods depend upon satisfying superiors' demands to make money. They have no incentive to offer ideas that would advance the public interest unless they increase profits. Projects that would serve the public interest - but at a financial cost to the corporation - are considered naive. Corporate law thus casts ethical and social concerns as irrelevant, or as stumbling blocks to the corporation's fundamental mandate. That's the effect the law has inside the corporation. Outside the corporation the effect is more devastating. It is the law that leads corporations to actively disregard harm to all interests other than those of shareholders. When toxic chemicals are spilled, forests destroyed, employees left in poverty, or communities devastated through plant shutdowns, corporations view these as unimportant side effects outside their area of concern. But when the company's stock price dips, that's a disaster. The reason is that, in our legal framework, a low stock price leaves a company vulnerable to takeover or means the ceo's job could be at risk.
In the end, the natural result is that the corporate bottom line goes up, and the state of the public good goes down. This is called privatizing the gain and externalizing the cost. This system design helps explain why the war against corporate abuse is being lost, despite decades of effort by thousands of organizations. Until now, tactics used to confront corporations have focussed on where and how much companies should be allowed to damage the public interest, rather than eliminating the reason they do it. When public interest groups protest a new power plant, mercury poisoning, or a new big store, the groups don't examine the corporations' motives. They only seek to limit where damage is created (not in our back yard) and how much damage is created (a little less please). But the where-and-how-much approach is reactive, not proactive. Even when corporations are defeated in particular battles, they go on the next day, in other ways and other places, to pursue their own private interests at the expense of the public.
Many corporations are in positions to kill millions through design or accident. Look at bayer sending hiv contaminated drugs overseas. Or the liability vs recall math. Is it cheaper to recall the poisoned/defective product or pay off the victims?
Big corporations no longer care about your puny 9.95 purchase now that they have top level government officials in their pockets. They simply have the guys with the guns steal more from you and they make waaaaay more from "bailout/stimulus" monies.
quote:
Our government (which you don't too seem concerned about)
I am VERY concerned about our government, governance and keeping our republic a republic instead of this thing we got now. I dislike fascism and do not wish to see my country go down the same road as others who thought it a fine idea.
multinational corporations have what they want offshore, untouchable, or hidden. They transfer their wealth to the prevailing currencies/assets. This whole system is rigged against us. |
The silver [is] mine, and the gold [is] mine, saith the LORD of hosts. Hag 2:8 [/b]
He created it. He controls it. He gave it to us for His use. Why did we turn from sound scriptural currency that PROTECTS us?
KJV Bible w/ Strong's Concordance: http://www.blueletterbible.org/
The book of The Hundreds: http://www.land.netonecom.net/tlp/ref/boh/bookOfTheHundreds_v4.1.pdf
The Two Republics: http://www.whitehorsemedia.com/docs/THE_TWO_REPUBLICS.pdf
Good reading: http://ecclesia.org/truth/government.html
A number of people are educated beyond, sometimes way beyond, their intelligence. - Tenbears
|
|
|
|
moboman
1000+ Penny Miser Member
USA
2555 Posts |
Posted - 01/23/2010 : 10:07:12
|
| I'm not sure I understand. If the constitution doesnt put any limit on pay, why was it a 5-4 vote instead of a 9-0 vote? Either it's constitutional or it isnt, correct? |
"99% of all lawyers give the rest of them a bad name" 
|
|
|
|
giddyup99
Penny Pincher Member
USA
154 Posts |
Posted - 01/23/2010 : 11:34:26
|
I like the ruling. I also like corporations, and feel they should have a voice.
I vote with my pen and my dollars. I support the people, politicians, and corporations who support the ideas I align myself to.
I don't expect a business to operate based on feelings.
Make money, create jobs, grow your businesses and corporations within the framework that our government allows. If as a corporation, you collectively decide a specific politician or piece of legislation is not in your best interest, I have no qualms about your buying some ad time to support your cause.
I love hearing people go nuts about "special interests". Everything is a special interest, really. We have a Bill of Rights and a Constitution that outlines our basic human interests, everything else could be considered "special".
You want less central power, and less corruption among elected leaders? Take away the power of incumbency. Term limits. Face it, our electorate now supports whomever can promise the most to the populace; Realistic or not. We have an uneducated electorate - and I don't mean they didn't go to school.
|
Experience is what you get when you don't get what you want. |
|
|
|
Kurr
1000+ Penny Miser Member
2906 Posts |
Posted - 01/23/2010 : 11:59:54
|
First of all, I am suprised at the defence of this ruling. How ever, we are supposed to have differing opinions, and I thank you guys for your responses.
I am just curious, since transnational corporations are well thought of by some, what are your thoughts on state and national soveriegnty issues?
Should foreign corporations with US holdings be allowed to influence US elections? |
The silver [is] mine, and the gold [is] mine, saith the LORD of hosts. Hag 2:8 [/b]
He created it. He controls it. He gave it to us for His use. Why did we turn from sound scriptural currency that PROTECTS us?
KJV Bible w/ Strong's Concordance: http://www.blueletterbible.org/
The book of The Hundreds: http://www.land.netonecom.net/tlp/ref/boh/bookOfTheHundreds_v4.1.pdf
The Two Republics: http://www.whitehorsemedia.com/docs/THE_TWO_REPUBLICS.pdf
Good reading: http://ecclesia.org/truth/government.html
A number of people are educated beyond, sometimes way beyond, their intelligence. - Tenbears
|
|
|
|
theo
Penny Hoarding Member
USA
588 Posts |
Posted - 01/23/2010 : 12:13:13
|
quote:
Our government (which you don't too seem concerned about)
I am VERY concerned about our government, governance and keeping our republic a republic instead of this thing we got now. I dislike fascism and do not wish to see my country go down the same road as others who thought it a fine idea.
multinational corporations have what they want offshore, untouchable, or hidden. They transfer their wealth to the prevailing currencies/assets. This whole system is rigged against us.
[/quote]
"They transfer their wealth to the prevailing currencies/assets."
Don't corporations have a right or even an obligation to protect their wealth? Besides aren't we doing the exact same thing by acquiring silver coins and searching for copper pennies?
I understand that there are plenty of examples of corporate greed and irresponsibility causing death and misery. I think another good example would be Union Carbide in Bophol India about 25 years ago. However these situations simply pale in comparison with Mao, Stalin, Hitler, and Pol Pot (believe me I could go on). And do we even know how many millions have been starved to death in North Korea? All of the corporate malfeasence in history couldn't even approach one these examples.
When corporations damage society they are, by en large, made to answer for their crimes and compensate their victims. I don't recall anything about the Chinese Government paying off the victims of Chairman Mao's atrocities. Of course that would be a tall order since Mao is personally responsible for at least 40 million deaths (some say 60 million).
I think we agree that there is a serious problem when corporations and governments co-mingle, I just think that most oppression comes from unfettered government power. Corporations, at least, have to create real value to acquire money and power. |
Edited by - theo on 01/23/2010 12:20:21 |
|
|
|
theo
Penny Hoarding Member
USA
588 Posts |
Posted - 01/23/2010 : 12:31:30
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kurr
First of all, I am suprised at the defence of this ruling. How ever, we are supposed to have differing opinions, and I thank you guys for your responses.
I am just curious, since transnational corporations are well thought of by some, what are your thoughts on state and national soveriegnty issues?
Should foreign corporations with US holdings be allowed to influence US elections?
Honestly I would be very concerned if a foreign-owned conglomerate attempted to influence our elections. However, I believe the Constitution only extends free speech protection to corporations domeciled in the U.S. Having said that, its something worth monitoring |
|
|
|
Common Cents
Penny Sorter Member
82 Posts |
Posted - 01/24/2010 : 09:55:38
|
A wonderful idea! Why not just let each corporation that can afford to dole out a billion have their own representative in CONgress? There's been a revolving door between Washington and the corporate world for years. After their terms are finished in Washington, it's common for retired politicians to be hired as lobbyists and board members for large corporate interests. You have pharmacy lobbyists writing the health care bill, and you have credit card lobbyists writing the bankruptcy bills, and oil companies drive our foreign policy. Don't believe me? Just ask Dick Cheney.
This ruling just legitimizes what's been going on for years. Our government has been hopelessly hijacked by the corporate world, and now they have their sights set on the world at large. The New World Order is reliant upon for corporate support to achieve their goals. It's essential that they be stopped, lest we all end up as slaves. |
|
|
|
redneck
1000+ Penny Miser Member
1273 Posts |
|
|
Kurr
1000+ Penny Miser Member
2906 Posts |
Posted - 01/29/2010 : 10:21:01
|
Thanks Redneck, good read.
quote:
However, I believe the Constitution only extends free speech protection to corporations domeciled in the U.S.
What is domiciled? P.O. Box and a tax form?
Citgo owned by Venezuela? China has few big ones here too I think, perhaps even Russia, and lol, maybe Iran!
Anyone know how many foreign owned corporations are now in the U.S.?
How about the corporations and consortiums that are getting them 99 year leases of our public roadways. Do they get a voice as well?
|
The silver [is] mine, and the gold [is] mine, saith the LORD of hosts. Hag 2:8 [/b]
He created it. He controls it. He gave it to us for His use. Why did we turn from sound scriptural currency that PROTECTS us?
KJV Bible w/ Strong's Concordance: http://www.blueletterbible.org/
The book of The Hundreds: http://www.land.netonecom.net/tlp/ref/boh/bookOfTheHundreds_v4.1.pdf
The Two Republics: http://www.whitehorsemedia.com/docs/THE_TWO_REPUBLICS.pdf
Good reading: http://ecclesia.org/truth/government.html
A number of people are educated beyond, sometimes way beyond, their intelligence. - Tenbears
|
|
|
|
Ardent Listener
Administrator
USA
4841 Posts |
Posted - 01/29/2010 : 19:24:44
|
quote:
Originally posted by giddyup99
I like the ruling. I also like corporations, and feel they should have a voice.
I vote with my pen and my dollars. I support the people, politicians, and corporations who support the ideas I align myself to.
I don't expect a business to operate based on feelings.
Make money, create jobs, grow your businesses and corporations within the framework that our government allows. If as a corporation, you collectively decide a specific politician or piece of legislation is not in your best interest, I have no qualms about your buying some ad time to support your cause.
I love hearing people go nuts about "special interests". Everything is a special interest, really. We have a Bill of Rights and a Constitution that outlines our basic human interests, everything else could be considered "special".
You want less central power, and less corruption among elected leaders? Take away the power of incumbency. Term limits. Face it, our electorate now supports whomever can promise the most to the populace; Realistic or not. We have an uneducated electorate - and I don't mean they didn't go to school.
Prior to corporate corruption of elections we had term limits, they were called elections. |
Realcent.forumco.com disclosure. Please read.
All posts either by the members, moderators, and the administration of http://realcent.forumco.com are for your edification and amusement only. It is not the intent of realcent.forumco.com or its host to provide investment, medical, matrimonial, legal, security or tax advice and nothing posted here should be considered to be so. All rights reserved.
Think positive. |
|
|
|
giddyup99
Penny Pincher Member
USA
154 Posts |
Posted - 01/29/2010 : 20:26:38
|
We've had 20 years of restricting corporations contributions. How's that working out for us? 2 Bushes, a Clinton, an Obama, and a litany of morons running the halls of the congress and senate. It will never happen, but real term limits on the house and senate are what is needed.
Honestly, I think all the US corporations could get together and pick better candidates than the people at this point. |
Experience is what you get when you don't get what you want. |
|
|
|
theo
Penny Hoarding Member
USA
588 Posts |
Posted - 01/30/2010 : 08:19:36
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kurr
Thanks Redneck, good read.
quote:
However, I believe the Constitution only extends free speech protection to corporations domeciled in the U.S.
What is domiciled? P.O. Box and a tax form?
Citgo owned by Venezuela? China has few big ones here too I think, perhaps even Russia, and lol, maybe Iran!
Anyone know how many foreign owned corporations are now in the U.S.?
How about the corporations and consortiums that are getting them 99 year leases of our public roadways. Do they get a voice as well?
To be able to run political ads in the U.S. a corporation must be headquartered in the U.S. as well as conduct most of its business here. In addition to that, no corporation can use any foreign profits to purchase political advertising. Finally, I believe there is a law against corporations contributing directly to the political campaigns of candidates. They can only run advocacy ads for and against candidates and ideas.
Remember that this case was about whether a group ("Citizens United" I believe) which accepted corporate donations, could create and distribute a documentary critizing Hillary Clinton. I believe that, at one point during the arguments the Government lawyer (Solicitor General?) was asked whether this type of criticism would be banned if it were in a book. The answer was something like, "If the book was printed and distributed using corporate donations, then yes."
|
|
|
|
cptindy
Penny Hoarding Member
572 Posts |
Posted - 01/30/2010 : 19:29:20
|
Just curious!!!
Theo
"I think we agree that there is a serious problem when corporations and governments co-mingle, I just think that most oppression comes from unfettered government power. Corporations, at least, have to create real value to acquire money and power".
How much real value did Enron create? Or say Haliburton? How about the Federal Reserve? I must be confused as to true value.
I mean no disrespect here and am only trying to understand some folks perception. |
"It is the nature of the human species to reject what is true but unpleasant and to embrace what is obviously false but comforting"
" The average man doesn't want to be free. He wants to be safe."
H.L. Mencken
http://silver-news-today.com/ |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Court decision opens floodgates for corporate cash
Forum Locked
