Yeah...they did that. I don't agree with them, but it's hardly the
first time I thought they were wrong. Damn activist judges.
On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 6:28 PM, Vivec wrote:
>
> And that is why the Supreme Court ruled that a Corporation is
> effectively an Individual.
> And basically has all th
Oh..I forgot...
TUM Ta TUM TUM!!!
TUM ta tum tum TU!!!
On 27 October 2010 21:28, Vivec wrote:
> Setting the stage for the world to be run by psychopathic and
> sociopathic corporations
> that are driven by and represent all the evil and flawed impulses of humanity.
And that is why the Supreme Court ruled that a Corporation is
effectively an Individual.
And basically has all the rights of an individual.
Setting the stage for the world to be run by psychopathic and
sociopathic corporations
that are driven by and represent all the evil and flawed impulses of h
Once again, those freedoms only apply to individuals. No one is
stopping an individual from from associating. No one is stopping the
individual from petitioning Congress. The proposal is to eliminate
the contribution of money and the influence over Congress by lobbies.
I don't see that one a
Freedom to associate and " to petition the Government for a redress of
grievances." both from the first amendment, mean that lobbying even
as it is now stays. You'd have to rewrite the Constitution to change
those two provisions.
On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 7:03 PM, Maureen wrote:
>
> Free speech a
Free speech applies to the individual. We each get one voice.
Eliminating lobbying would not suppress the free speech of the
individual.
The NRA is no more the voice of the individual that the RIAA..both
claim to represent their members, but in reality they are simply
fronts for their corporate
Yeah, and are they even really "saying" anything? Is there a public
record of the money spent?
Can I plead the 5th on my tax return?
Sadly, the conservatives in this country seem to kowtow to the all
mighty dollar.
"BP is swell!", "Regulation is Bad for Business!", "Being
environmentally res
hould be the people who hired
> them. Too bad American politics will never allow that.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Casey Dougall [mailto:ca...@uberwebsitesolutions.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2010 5:08 PM
> To: cf-community
> Subject: Re: change baby!
>
> It would be b
riginal Message-
From: Eric Roberts [mailto:ow...@threeravensconsulting.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 27, 2010 10:52 AM
To: cf-community
Subject: RE: change baby!
I would disagree...despite what the SCOTUS says, I don't think a
corporation
is a person and thus does not have
allow that.
-Original Message-
From: Casey Dougall [mailto:ca...@uberwebsitesolutions.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2010 5:08 PM
To: cf-community
Subject: Re: change baby!
It would be better if special intrest groups and unions and corporations
stuck to lobbying and left election cycl
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 6:55 PM, Vivec wrote:
>
> Barack threatens the hegemony of corporate America.
Sorry, but nobody could be that clueless.
Try again.
~|
Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now!
http://www.amazon.com/Adob
What did Obama spend like a billion dollars to win?
Now Sorros won't waste his money on a losing fight so the dems are
crying no fair.
Well it isn't fair knowing the big corps spent $200 BILLION dollars on the GOP.
:P
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 6:47 PM, Larry C. Lyons wrote:
>
> FWIW:
> http://w
Barack threatens the hegemony of corporate America.
That's great for the general public...you know the remaining 80% of the
country...
but the 20% fat cats aren't going to give up without a fight.
What I can't understand, is how people support that imbalance and find
justification in it...and wo
FWIW:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/10/26/AR2010102604705.html
Big money: Outside groups spending for Republicans
By JIM KUHNHENN
The Associated Press
Tuesday, October 26, 2010; 5:33 PM
WASHINGTON -- A year ago, two top Republican strategists sat down for
lunch at the
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 3:04 PM, Robert Munn wrote:
>
> unions are apparently spending north of $250 million this election cycle. if
> they can spend, so can corporations.
>
Of course unions are still bound by disclosure rules that corporations
aren't. Regardless, I'm against unlimited spending
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 6:04 PM, Robert Munn wrote:
>
>
>
> unions are apparently spending north of $250 million this election cycle.
> if
> they can spend, so can corporations.
>
>
>
It would be better if special intrest groups and unions and corporations
stuck to lobbying and left election cyc
That's funny
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 5:51 PM, Eric Roberts
wrote:
>
> BTW...listing ACORN just shows that you lack any integrity since the only
> thing wrong with the whole ACORN issue was that the film maker and
> republicans in Congress were not indicted for fraud.
>
~
:43 PM
To: cf-community
Subject: Re: change baby!
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 5:17 PM, Vivec wrote:
>
> Uhh...yes it is change.
>
> Let's hope it continues past NOvember.
>
> " tarnished by financial scandals and the influence of money in politics,"
>
> Since all
Did he try to sell a seat?
I'm not sure if IT ever heard of him.
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 5:49 PM, Eric Roberts
wrote:
>
> While you are mentioning Blago, don't forget to
> Ryan to that list...he's the Republican who preceded Blago both in the
> governor's office and in jail.
>
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 2:42 PM, Judah McAuley wrote:
>
> The Citizens United ruling falls squarely on the shoulders of Bush
> though. He knew what he was doing when he appointed Roberts and
> Roberts did a brilliant job of not saying shit to Congress and not
> giving them a reason that they cou
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 5:17 PM, Vivec wrote:
>
> And the Supreme Court (top Republican picks) Voting that there's no limit
> to
> corporate financing of political campaigns.
>
>
Yup, Republicorp, and Demincorp this year... Watch for those big spenders.
~~~
While you are mentioning Blago, don't forget to
Ryan to that list...he's the Republican who preceded Blago both in the
governor's office and in jail.
-Original Message-
From: Sam [mailto:sammyc...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2010 4:43 PM
To: cf-community
Subj
His a tissue, you have some foam on your mouth.
Yeah, over there and there and there...
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 5:42 PM, Judah McAuley wrote:
>
> Financial deregulation largely happened under a Republican Congress
> with a Republican President. The following Democratic Congress
> certainly deser
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 5:17 PM, Vivec wrote:
>
> Uhh...yes it is change.
>
> Let's hope it continues past NOvember.
>
> " tarnished by financial scandals and the influence of money in politics,"
>
> Since all the things highlighted occurred under a Republican Government,
> including the Financia
Financial deregulation largely happened under a Republican Congress
with a Republican President. The following Democratic Congress
certainly deserves part of the blame, however, for not doing much to
reign it back in and it certainly deserves a lot of scorn for not
doing much to reform things even
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 2:17 PM, Vivec wrote:
>
> Uhh...yes it is change.
>
> Let's hope it continues past NOvember.
>
> " tarnished by financial scandals and the influence of money in politics,"
>
> Since all the things highlighted occurred under a Republican Government,
> including the Financi
Uhh...yes it is change.
Let's hope it continues past NOvember.
" tarnished by financial scandals and the influence of money in politics,"
Since all the things highlighted occurred under a Republican Government,
including the Financial meltdown.
And the Supreme Court (top Republican picks) Votin
27 matches
Mail list logo
