Have you heard about the new S. Court ruleing that allows unlimited funding of political champaines by big corps.?  Am I alone in being frightened and appauled?

Views: 257

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I have already written both my senators and my congressperson, reminding them just WHO put them in office. I also wrote John McCain, who co-wrote McCain-Feingold, and urged him to take another shot at it.

Also, got to love the quote on the petition listed above:

“I hope we shall... crush in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and to bid defiance to the laws of our country.”

~ Thomas Jefferson, letter to George Logan. November 12, 1816
What a brilliant mind that man was in possession of ...

Two hundred years, and still nothing has changed with the hominid mind; is it any wonder that history forever repeats?
I should mention ... I actually got an answer from Senator Sherrod Brown regarding my displeasure with that Supreme Court decision. Interestingly, neither Senator Voinovich nor Congresswoman Fudge have answered. That said, I am considering a second note to both of them ... letting them both know that I am NOT PLEASED with their lack of response ... and while Mr. Voinovich is retiring at the end of his term, that I will be ON HIS CASE until it ends ... and if Ms. Fudge wishes to retain her position, she can demonstrate the ability to RESPOND when a constituent expresses a opinion or a position or a reaction to current events.
Dan Dupree writes: "The corporatate oligarchy that runs this country has been moving wealth and power to an ever decreasing number of people."

That's the same old conspiracy malarkey I've been hearing for 66 years.

I'm well aware of the dangers of run away corporate power but don't get the silly idea in your liberal heads that having the federal government control your lives would be one damned bit better.
Come now Rusty, let's be rational about this for a moment;

Social security is insolvent.

Public education creates unthinking, social conforming, tax paying drones.

Jerry Springer is still on the air, as is WWE, Girls Gone Wild and a slew of channels, unlocked/unprotected for teenagers to view porn.

The military is fighting two wars, on two fronts for ... reasons no one yet understands.

TARP funds are still flowing.

Housing is still in decline, foreclosures are still rising, financial institutions are still receiving Federal loans and clamping down on credit loaning.

Structural unemployment is stable at 17.2%.

Obviously, we need more government involvement in society and the free market; they're doing quite the bang-up job ...

Furthering socio-economic stratification by giving corporations all the rights of an individual is just burying the Constitutional authority for the benefit of an oligarchic enterprise to take hold of everything. This will completely dissolve the Rule of Law; which is obviously beneficial to all individual liberties ...

Definitely, it is all the fault of "evil" corporations; Congress is just a smashing success ...

or ...

Not.
Springer's success represents the ineffable fucking stupidity of the sheepled masses. It should be self-evident.

Releasing corporations from their responsibility by assigning them equal rights under the "individual" clause, directly violates both SCT and the Constitutional authority; it will not end well for the society at large. Oligarchic influence in our government by powerful lobbying organisations ... the will of the People is about to ... well, read about the fall of Rome, it becomes apparent.
The next election cycle's political advertising will look more like an episode of his show than ever before. ;)
Let us not "throw the baby out with the bath water". Specifically, although we could easily get along without the WWE, "Girls Gone Wild" clearly has great social value.

Regards,
GaryB
Rusty said:
I'm well aware of the dangers of run away corporate power but don't get the silly idea in your liberal heads that having the federal government control your lives would be one damned bit better.

Well that is certainly a false dichotomy. I don't hear any "liberals" calling for federal control of their lives. You are responding to one socialist, and he didn't exactly call for a federal socialist dictatorship.
I'm well aware of the dangers of run away corporate power but don't get the silly idea in your liberal heads that having the federal government control your lives would be one damned bit better.

I'm still confused how it's the just the damned liberals that somehow desire federal government control over our lives.

- Warrantless wiretapping and domestic spying: Republican idea.

- Arresting without charges or a warrant and holding people indefinitely without trial: Republican idea.

- Not allowed to film/photograph coffins returning from Iraq: Republican idea.

- Women not allowed medical control over their own uterus': Republican idea.

- Government nosing into marriage rights: Republican idea.

- Stricter background checks and checking ID at the voting booth out of fear of illegal immigrants: Republican idea.

- When a terrorist makes an attempt on us, "Why didn't the government stick its nose even further into this person's background to see if he was dangerous?" (which means nosing further into your background as well to see if you are dangerous): Republican idea.

- Tighter government-led censorship to keep offensive (i.e.; Non-Christian) material out of children's view (vs. letting the parents do that themselves): Republican idea.

- Forcing Creationism into Science classrooms: Republican idea.

- Christian displays allowed on Government property, but not Atheist or other religious displays: Republican idea.

- Forcing prayer into public schools and public forums: Republican idea.

And what do the damned liberals seem to want that's so horrible?

- Division of taxes: Those who make more can afford to contribute more.

- Regulation (because we see what the banks did unregulated. See "The Jungle" by Upton Sinclair for what the food industry does unregulated. I can't imagine what the drug companies would be pumping into us if they weren't regulated).

- Campaign reform making campaigns about the candidate and his/her stance on the issues: Not who has the most money to buy the best sales pitch.

- As every citizen is entitled to basic life; police, fire, public school, affordable health care.
To be fair, there are many liberals who wish to control: whether a person smokes, what food one consumes, what can be done with her or his own property for environmental reasons, and to censor language so as to not offend members of particular groups. I was saddened when the governor of Michigan decided that fighting smoking was a priority in the state that leads the nation at losing jobs. I'm not pro-smoking, but it is clear that both liberals and conservatives like to curb personal freedoms. We have noticed our personal freedoms being imposed upon by conservatives more, because they have had more power in this nation for quite some time.
To be fair, there are many liberals who wish to control:

Some do go overboard, but 'control' often gets confused for 'regulate so it doesn't hurt other people.'

- whether a person smokes,

I've yet to hear anyone say smoking in general should be illegal. Just smoking where other people are subjected to it. For the same reason I should not be allowed to come into your workplace, where you're trying to eat, where you're trying to walk or enter a building, and dump my dirty cat litter into your lap, a smoker can keep their poisons to themselves.

- what food one consumes,

I've yet to hear anyone propose outlawing food unless it's outright proposed as poisonous. Junk food? Keeping it out of schools doesn't prevent a kid from bringing their own. I'm a bit of a junk food junkie and I'm all for a tax on junk food to help pay for health care.

- what can be done with her or his own property for environmental reasons,

Not sure what's wrong with that. Like smoking, what you do to your land often seeps into other people's land. No, you should not be allowed to dump toxic waste in your backyard where it seeps into the ground water and ends up in my kitchen tap. For the same reasons I should not be allowed to put rat poison in your taco salad.

- and to censor language so as to not offend members of particular groups.

Aside from flat-out racial slurs in, say, public schools, I've not heard of anyone advocating out-and-out censorship except the Religious Right. Saying, "Lumping all Muslims together as terrorists is derogatory and unproductive" is not the same as proposing a law to prevent people from doing that. Neither is writing a letter to NBC that you think Don Imus should be fired for calling WNBA players "Nappy headed hoes."

- I was saddened when the governor of Michigan decided that fighting smoking was a priority in the state that leads the nation at losing jobs.

Being from Michigan myself, I'd agree except that "A" priority does not mean "The only priority." Cleaning my home today is "A" priority to me. Sensible, but not if it were "The only" priority as I have other, even more important things to do. For millions like me who are so affected by secondhand smoke that we absolutely can not be around it, no-smoking laws in workplaces and public places is a step towards helping us get back into the workplace.

- it is clear that both liberals and conservatives like to curb personal freedoms.

But one far, far more so than the other. Some freedoms are better off curbed. You don't have the freedom to put cyanide in my lungs. Your neighbor doesn't have the freedom to honor-kill his sister. A gay couple should have the freedom to get married. I would love to have the freedom to choose an affordable, government health plan while my Teabagger friend remains free to choose Blue Cross.

RSS

About

line

Update Your Membership :

Membership

line

Nexus on Social Media:

© 2020   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: The Nexus Group.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service