Supreme Court privatizes government

[lucy]

It doesn't exclude corporations, does it?

My personal feeling is that everyone who gets money from whatever source, especially lobbyists of foreign concerns should have to declare how much they received openly....I like the NASCAR idea:D

[johnhp]

It doesn't exclude corporations, does it?

Well, i am waiting for a poster to show me the word "corporation" in the 1st amendment.  The burden is on him.

My personal feeling is that everyone who gets money from whatever source, especially lobbyists of foreign concerns should have to declare how much they received openly....I like the NASCAR idea:D

How much and from whom.  Specifically.  None of these cute names like, you know Puppies for environmental deregulation.

i do not know what no one will take me up on that idea.  Maybe there is not enough fabric in the world!!!

[lucy]

The word was not very much in use in the 18th century/

[johnhp]

The word was not very much in use in the 18th century/

Then the document would not apply.

[Velleity]

Corporations were anathema to our founding fathers. There were only a few corporations, to wit the British East India Tea Company. Anyone who knows their history knows that our founding fathers would not have been so eager to grant that entity a bill of rights.

[johnhp]

Corporations were anathema to our founding fathers. There were only a few corporations, to wit the British East India Tea Company. Anyone who knows their history knows that our founding fathers would not have been so eager to grant that entity a bill of rights.

i am waiting for someone to show me the word corporation in the first amendment. 

[Velleity]

i am waiting for someone to show me the word corporation in the first amendment. 

Our "strict constructionist," self-proclaimed Constitutional scholar is awfully quiet.

[lucy]

The point is that freedom of speech should be protected...freedom of campaign donations should be perhaps protected but shouted from the rooftops for everyone to see who is doing what to whom, imo. There are conflicts of interests in politics that need to be addressed.

[johnhp]

Our "strict constructionist," self-proclaimed Constitutional scholar is awfully quiet.

i am giving him the benefit of the doubt.  i am sure the word corporate is in there.

[johnhp]

The point is that freedom of speech should be protected...freedom of campaign donations should be perhaps protected but shouted from the rooftops for everyone to see who is doing what to whom, imo. There are conflicts of interests in politics that need to be addressed.

That is exactly right.  politics should be a glass house.

[Velleity]

The point is that freedom of speech should be protected...freedom of campaign donations should be perhaps protected but shouted from the rooftops for everyone to see who is doing what to whom, imo. There are conflicts of interests in politics that need to be addressed.

A few hours ago you were saying that Obama should be less in league with elitists and now you're apologizing for what has to be the greatest gift to elitists in the past two centuries?

Shame on you.

[johnhp]

A few hours ago you were saying that Obama should be less in league with elitists and now you're apologizing for what has to be the greatest gift to elitists in the past two centuries?

Shame on you.

i misread that.  thanks for bringing this up.  Although i do agree with transparency.

[lucy]

SHAME ON ME??


You, the party of the Clintons and George Soros? You underestimate how megacorporations give to DEMOCRATS/


Think about it.....

[Velleity]

SHAME ON ME??


You, the party of the Clintons and George Soros? You underestimate how megacorporations give to DEMOCRATS/


Think about it.....

The Democrats are nothing compared to the Republicans, who used the Bush administration to create the largest transfer of wealth to the top 1% in history. They got so rich the last 10 years. Do you think that was an accident?

Give me a break.

[lucy]

Certainly foreign companies give more to the democrats through various foundations and such even that have been set up...

This is not a party issue. This is really about Washington wanting its cake and eat it too without the American public realizing how many interests out there are paying for privileges to both parties.

I did not say I was for the legislation, per se, but I am for freedom of speech, which I think is the last stand against tyranny of various stripes.