20th Sep 12, 19:25 #281
20th Sep 12, 19:26 #282
20th Sep 12, 20:16 #283
Say it loud and say it proud: 999!"Every generation's memory is exactly as long as its own experience." --John Kenneth Galbraith
20th Sep 12, 21:26 #284
Companies in particular have legal personhood which means that they have the legal right to hold property, to sue and be sued, they may conduct business and appoint agents; in fact every single legal power that a natural person has except to be able to get married, a company also has. In some cases such as setting up a pension fund or a trust where property is to be held in the hands of a separate person, the veil of personhood is prudent legal planning because it means that a natural person may be sued but the assets of the pension fund or trust remain intact.Would you rather have butter or guns? Shall we import lard or steel?
Por que no los dos?
20th Sep 12, 21:38 #285
Though the water's great guardian shall arise to quell the fighting, alone its song will fail, and thus the earth shall turn to ash.
- Also from Pokémon the Movie 2000.
Actually Britain does have its own politician who can quote pop culture references from children's television... Nick Clegg. Nick Clegg has been doing impressions of Sooty every since Cameron became PM.Would you rather have butter or guns? Shall we import lard or steel?
Por que no los dos?
20th Sep 12, 22:42 #286
- Join Date
- Sep 2012
He still has not answered any questions posed to him. He is adept at getting false information and posting Republican talking points that are so full of holes that that anyone could fall through. Imagine that, a person getting medical care because Danica fan had to prove his citizenship. I suppose he would prefer to live in Darfour(sic).
20th Sep 12, 23:37 #287
You still did not explain what YOU did to "defend the country".
And how that grants you the right to sneer at people in the country doing actual productive work to make the country move.
Just because you were in a uniform does not mean you did a thing to "defend" the country..
Who did you defend us against?
20th Sep 12, 23:49 #288
Don't bother with the what did you do while serving argument; it's just a draw to change the subject. Service is no justification for or against anything. Consider the arguments on their merits, then have a laugh.
21st Sep 12, 00:17 #289
Rollie-baby, love your stuff, you write marveluous.
I hope you have time to glance at this:
In Citizens United (2010), the Court held that private corporations, which are nowhere mentioned in the Constitution and are not political membership organizations, enjoy the same political free speech rights as people under the First Amendment and may draw on the wealth of their treasuries to spend unlimited sums promoting or disparaging candidates for public office. The billions of dollars thus turned loose for campaign purposes at the direction of corporate managers not only can be, but — under the terms of corporate law — must be spent to increase profits. If businesses choose to exercise their newly minted political “money speech” rights, they must work to install officials who will act as corporate tools. The Court, transformed by the addition of Chief Justice Roberts and Samuel Alito, who were nominated by that lucky winner in Bush v. Gore, took this giant step to the right of all prior Courts without even being asked to do so.
The petitioner, Citizens United, sought only a ruling that the electioneering provisions of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (better known as McCain-Feingold) didn’t apply to its on-demand movie about Hillary Clinton.
But the conservative (Judges) sent the parties back to brief and argue the paradigm-shifting constitutional question they were so keen to decide. As dissenting Justice John Paul Stevens observed, the justices in the majority “changed the case to give themselves an opportunity to change the law.”
Before Citizens United came down, corporations were already spending billions of dollars lobbying, running “issue ads,” launching political action committees and soliciting PAC contributions. Moreover, CEOs, top executives and board directors — the people whose income and wealth have soared over the past several decades in relation to the rest of America — have always contributed robustly to candidates. But there was one crucial thing that CEOs could not do before Citizens United: reach into their corporate treasuries to bankroll campaigns promoting or opposing the election of candidates for Congress or president. This prohibition essentially established a wall of separation — not especially thick or tall, but a wall nonetheless — between corporate treasury wealth and campaigns for federal office.
The Roberts Court’s 5-4 decision to demolish most of this wall also bulldozed the foundational understanding of the corporation that had governed American law for two centuries. The Court had always regarded the corporation not as a citizen with constitutional rights, but as an “artificial entity” chartered by the states and endowed with extraordinary privileges in order to serve society’s economic purposes. The great conservative Chief Justice John Marshall wrote in the Dartmouth College case (1819), “A corporation is an artificial being, invisible, intangible, and existing only in contemplation of law. Being the mere creature of law, it possesses only those properties which the charter of creation confers upon it, either expressly, or as incidental to its very existence.”
The Bellotti decision cracked open the door of campaign finance law, and the Citizens United majority blew that door off its hinges.
'Citizens United' on the Corporate Court | BillMoyers.com
More, an hour of some of the bst discussion in the country here;
Full Show: The One Percent Court | Moyers & Company | BillMoyers.com
Wiki has a nice detailed analysis of the decision..
Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[h=Criticisms]3[/h] [h=American politicians]4[/h] President Barack Obama stated that the decision "gives the special interests and their lobbyists even more power in Washington — while undermining the influence of average Americans who make small contributions to support their preferred candidates". Obama later elaborated in his weekly radio address saying, "this ruling strikes at our democracy itself" and "I can't think of anything more devastating to the public interest". On January 27, 2010, Obama further condemned the decision during the 2010 State of the Union Address, stating that, "Last week, the Supreme Court reversed a century of law to open the floodgates for special interests — including foreign corporations — to spend without limit in our elections. Well I don't think American elections should be bankrolled by America's most powerful interests, or worse, by foreign entities."
Democratic senator Russ Feingold, a lead sponsor of the 2002 Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, stated "This decision was a terrible mistake. Presented with a relatively narrow legal issue, the Supreme Court chose to roll back laws that have limited the role of corporate money in federal elections since Teddy Roosevelt was president." Representative Alan Grayson, a Democrat, stated that it was "the worst Supreme Court decision since the Dred Scott case, and that the court had opened the door to political bribery and corruption in elections to come. Democratic congresswoman Donna Edwards, along with constitutional law professor and Maryland Democratic State Senator Jamie Raskin, have advocated petitions to reverse the decision by means of constitutional amendment. Rep. Leonard Boswell introduced legislation to amend the constitution. Senator John Kerry also called for an Amendment to overrule the decision. On December 8, 2011, Senator Bernie Sanders proposed the Saving American Democracy Amendment, which would reverse the court's ruling.
Republican Senator John McCain, co-crafter of the 2002 Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act and the party's 2008 presidential nominee, said "there's going to be, over time, a backlash ... when you see the amounts of union and corporate money that's going to go into political campaigns". McCain was "disappointed by the decision of the Supreme Court and the lifting of the limits on corporate and union contributions" but not surprised by the decision, saying that "It was clear that Justice Roberts, Alito and Scalia, by their very skeptical and even sarcastic comments, were very much opposed to BCRA." Republican Senator Olympia Snowe opined that "Today's decision was a serious disservice to our country."
But that was not the radical thing, it was the
I would like to point out that the legal fiction of corporation as person falls apart once the comparison step over from the Civil to the Criminal... Cops arrests baddies, courts put them on trial, and if it was a criminal act---including such things as criminal conspiracy---the courts send people to jail.
"Corporations" don't seem to get locked up very often---unlike ordinary citizens as we sop amply demonstrate with our 'Prison-Industrial Complex---we lock 'em up far better than all those limp-wristed Euro Sossi countries.
21st Sep 12, 00:23 #290
We need to help the poor miserable misguided bastids out by carefully disassembling their basic propositions, otherwise they will never learn..
So when they---absolutely having nothing to do with whatever discussion---bark "I defended the__________" we need to show them they probably did no such thing, and that that has nothing to do with anything...
21st Sep 12, 03:17 #291
I don't know why you are knocking the U.S. Navy. Everyone that I knew that joined at an impressionable age learned at least 3 things:
How to drink
How to smoke
How to swearThose who believe in telekinetics raise my hand.
21st Sep 12, 04:00 #292
Smoke by 7 1/2
Drink by 25--late developer---and it was the french who taught me that..
Now the US Air Farce----that's another story.
21st Sep 12, 06:38 #293
Are there only a bunch of liberals here ???? Where are the conservatives and Republicans at ?
I was in Intel in the Service so what I did was all Top Secret and again, what I did in the service is not the issue here or anyone's business to be honest.Danica Patrick- 2013 Sprint Cup Series Champion
21st Sep 12, 08:09 #294
Danicafan, I consider myself a conservative, but like Ronald Reagan said he never left the democratic party,the democratic party left him, I feel the same way about the republican party lately. Reagan is actually a good example. He would be considered a RINO today, what with granting amnesty to illegal aliens, cutting marginal tax rates,yes, but raising many others, no, and compromising and working with democrats to get deals done.
For me it started with the hard-line stance on immigration. I would listen to talk show hosts go on about immigration, and say to myself, "That's not right, that's not how it is." My wife is Mexican, and I know many immigrants, legal and illegal, and the characterization that conservative pundits make about illegal immigration is just flat out wrong. I also don't believe them anymore when they talk against deficits and fiscal conservancy. At one point, republicans controlled both houses and the presidency and deficits continued to get worse, so I take that rhetoric for what it is, "We want you to stop spending on your pet programs, so we can spend on ours." As an aside, I have actually come to the conclusion that deficits really don't matter (on the macro level), but I don't expect anyone to take my word for it. It's taken me two years of independent reading and thinking on economics to come to this point.
Like I stated earlier, the republican party seems tone-deaf right now, insulting people about not paying income taxes, when fully 1/2 or more are the very people most likely to vote republican (i.e. the elderly and white working class w/kids(remember included in the 47% were people who paid payroll taxes but got back 100% of their withholding.)) The problem with ideological purity is that your tent keeps getting smaller and smaller, and right now I am on the outside.
Oh, I'm not voting for Obama, but I am not voting for Romney either, of course where I live it doesn't matter. Obama will win my district(Memphis), and Romney will win Tennessee regardless of what I do. I hate to sound so cavalier about it, but I don't think it matters who wins. Forces outside of politics will eventually let us emerge from this lost decade, and things will be rosy for most once again. For me they already are. I'm a salesman and I had my best year ever last year, and this year is on pace to match or even exceed it. Hopefully everyone else can join in the boom times once again very soon.¿Quién es el que anda aquí?
21st Sep 12, 10:12 #295
Interesting post. It does raise the question "What drives the economy? Is it government policy and decisions or is it market forces, ie bankers' decisions and opinions?". Clearly government decisions can influence the direction the economy is going, or if you like give it a steer, but do they actually control it? I think not.
I'm not sure quite where the division of powers lies in the USA. To what extent can the President take action without the sanction of Congress (both houses) and by corollary without the consent of his party? In the context of this thread, are you really voting for the man or are you voting for his party's policies?
I appreciate that these are not easy questions to answer in the USA with its federalised structure.Duncan Rollo
The more you learn, the more you realise how little you know.
21st Sep 12, 10:19 #296
It's a very important point. As I understanding with my limited knowledge of American politics is that if the situation were the same in the UK, we'd have a Labour Prime Minister, yet a Tory majority in the Commons?Please 'like' our facebook page http://www.facebook.com/motorsportforums
21st Sep 12, 13:09 #297
In Citizens United (2010), the Court held that private corporations, which are nowhere mentioned in the Constitution and are not political membership organizations, enjoy the same political free speech rights as people under the First Amendment
Nowhere, huh? Tell me, where in the First Amendment does it define a "person" or "people".
Notwithstanding Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad 118 U.S. 394 (1886) which upheld corporations' rights of protection of personhood under the Fourteenth Amendment?
Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.
- Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution
Corporations are very much citizens of the United States, subject to the laws of the land and subject to taxation and the relevant laws which they reside in.
And then there's this:
Regulation S. Section 902(k)(1)
Definition of person:
1. Any natural person resident in the United States;
2. Any partnership or corporation organized or incorporated under the laws of the United States;
- Securities Act of 1933
Corporate personhood exists in all 50 states and in Federal Law.
Would you rather have butter or guns? Shall we import lard or steel?
Por que no los dos?
21st Sep 12, 13:51 #298
The point is that this stuff happened long after those tie-dyed years , when Abby came out of hiding .
I'm sure many of those who attended were expecting the bright flowing colours , but he told a rather more serious tale , and , frankly , it chilled us all ."No pen , no pen ." -what Sato said to me .
21st Sep 12, 17:27 #299
Chicago Seven - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Chicago Seven (originally Chicago Eight, also Conspiracy Eight/Conspiracy Seven) were seven defendants—Abbie Hoffman, Jerry Rubin, David Dellinger, Tom Hayden, Rennie Davis, John Froines, and Lee Weiner—charged with conspiracy, inciting to riot, and other charges related to protests that took place in Chicago, Illinois on the occasion of the 1968 Democratic National Convention. Bobby Seale, the eighth man charged, had his trial severed during the proceedings, lowering the number from eight to seven.
The 1968 Democratic National Convention was held in Chicago in late August—convened to select the party's candidates for the November 1968 Presidential election. Prior to and during the convention—which took place at the International Amphitheatre—rallies, demonstrations, marches, and attempted marches took place on the streets and in the lakefront parks, about five miles away from the convention site. These activities were primarily in protest of President Lyndon B. Johnson's policies for the Vietnam War, policies which were vigorously contested during the presidential primary campaign and inside the convention.
Last edited by Mr Alca-Tazizzle; 21st Sep 12 at 17:53.Those who believe in telekinetics raise my hand.
21st Sep 12, 18:52 #300
'Tis the tale , itself , not Abby's demise that chilled us all that day .
Chills came to me and many like me , I'm sure , later when we heard he had "killed himself" .
No names of who was actually running the "over-oval office" were offered , but Jimmy did offer John Tower specifically as both covert and treasonous in his initial involvement , and , most cynically set as the man to "cover his own tracks" in "The Tower Commission" .
Conveniently , Tower , in both roles could thus easily be played as a "rogue" , and was thus unlikely to ever reveal this plot against your president . Of course , he would also be corfortable .
I believe Abby told me the truth , and that Jimmy answered his own phone ."No pen , no pen ." -what Sato said to me .