Court Ruling

[Anthony703]

Originally Posted by Bubba

Toni. You should start by educating yourself. Turn Rush off. Turn Fox off. Your brain has been hijacked. Do you really think that a hand full of corporate executives who are only interested in their own welfare should be running our country? Wake up. Quit being blinded by your partisan ways. Expand your thinking and accept the fact that corporations aren't in the game to help you. Just grow up. While you're at it you should get off the something for nothing band wagon. I don't think anyone on this forum is out to get something for nothing. sure there are a lot of people who want something for nothing out there. I'm sure not one of them. I work hard for what I have. Just because I have empathy for people that have less than me doesn't make me useless.

It all comes down to one simple concept--no company, large or small, can compell you to buy their products and your unwillingness to purchase thier wares--bankruptcy. The government--Needing to make no profit, can either increase your taxes to cover their freewheeling lifestyle or--print more of it.

[God Bless America]

For what it's worth, saw a survey today that showed a breakdown of corporate donations since 1990.

Republican and Democrat candidates received equal support (within a few tenths of a percent). Union donations, on the other hand, went 98% to Democrats.

[Bubba]

Originally Posted by God Bless America

For what it's worth, saw a survey today that showed a breakdown of corporate donations since 1990.

Republican and Democrat candidates received equal support (within a few tenths of a percent). Union donations, on the other hand, went 98% to Democrats.

That sounds about right. Gee I wonder why the unions give more money to the Dems?

[God Bless America]

Originally Posted by Bubba

That sounds about right. Gee I wonder why the unions give more money to the Dems?

Hahahha...boy you are dumb.

Oooo...that was an attempt at sarcasm, right Bubbler?

[IndependentVoter]

Originally Posted by indyvoter

You are a partisian hack.

He is just a racist republican. he has no right to say anyting to us as we are combat veterans. He is a coward. He would never talk that way to either of us face to face.

[Anthony703]

Originally Posted by IndependentVoter

He is just a racist republican. he has no right to say anyting to us as we are combat veterans. He is a coward. He would never talk that way to either of us face to face.

Oooh, Oooh, Oooh--you are a veritable fount of verbal diahrrea, buttressed by a constipated mind, and should, as a combat veteran, bone up on the constitution that you swore and oath to. It lays out some basic freedoms that neither you or your vaunted progressive bretheren can take away from those americans that have contributed far more to this country than the feigned indignaton of a latrine orderly.
Additionally--you should control your propencity to verbose excess and the implied threats of violence. Who knows--I might just seek to chase down your skinny vegan a$$, just for the pleasure of finding out just how tough a combat vet you really are. I believe your primary problem exists because nobody has ever talked to you face to face in the necessary way to enlighten and teach some manners.

[Peri]

Originally Posted by God Bless America

For what it's worth, saw a survey today that showed a breakdown of corporate donations since 1990.

Republican and Democrat candidates received equal support (within a few tenths of a percent). Union donations, on the other hand, went 98% to Democrats.

Well, that's not too surprising. Corps can afford to buy influence on both sides, whereas unions have to put their bucks where they can do the most good. --Is your point that corporations' donations are neutral, but unions donations are underhanded? Heh, heh. Then, are you against the ruling since it will allow unions to "go wild"?

GBA, got a link to that survey?

On the whole subject of this SupCourt debacle, let's let Sandra Day O'Conner speak (CNN interview w/ Blitzer):


"It has the effect of turning judges into the politically elected figures in arms races, if you will, by people with the means to support them...And what the framework of our Constitution tried to achieve when they wrote that Constitution back in the 1700s was an independent federal judiciary."

She also worried about the power of special interests:

"We've seen massive problems now with the election of state court judges from special interest groups that want to affect the election...That was the reason why we went to elections in the first place, to get rid of special interests. But now they've come back with money, and so we have to re-examine again how we need to fix that."

Short of outright criticism, O'Connor pointedly referred to the ruling of McConnell vs. FEC in 2003 that she aut****d with Justice Stevens. The key quote in that ruling:

"Many years ago, we observed that '[t]o say that Congress is without power to pass appropriate legislation to safeguard...an election from the improper use of money to influence the result is to deny the nation in a vital particular the power of self protection.'...Money, like water, will always find an outlet."

[indyvoter]

Originally Posted by IndependentVoter

He is just a racist republican. he has no right to say anyting to us as we are combat veterans. He is a coward. He would never talk that way to either of us face to face.

You are transparent. Give up this fake moniker.

[God Bless America]

Originally Posted by Peri

Well, that's not too surprising. Corps can afford to buy influence on both sides, whereas unions have to put their bucks where they can do the most good. --Is your point that corporations' donations are neutral, but unions donations are underhanded? Heh, heh. Then, are you against the ruling since it will allow unions to "go wild"?

GBA, got a link to that survey?

On the whole subject of this SupCourt debacle, let's let Sandra Day O'Conner speak (CNN interview w/ Blitzer):


"It has the effect of turning judges into the politically elected figures in arms races, if you will, by people with the means to support them...And what the framework of our Constitution tried to achieve when they wrote that Constitution back in the 1700s was an independent federal judiciary."

She also worried about the power of special interests:

"We've seen massive problems now with the election of state court judges from special interest groups that want to affect the election...That was the reason why we went to elections in the first place, to get rid of special interests. But now they've come back with money, and so we have to re-examine again how we need to fix that."

Short of outright criticism, O'Connor pointedly referred to the ruling of McConnell vs. FEC in 2003 that she aut****d with Justice Stevens. The key quote in that ruling:

"Many years ago, we observed that '[t]o say that Congress is without power to pass appropriate legislation to safeguard...an election from the improper use of money to influence the result is to deny the nation in a vital particular the power of self protection.'...Money, like water, will always find an outlet."

Wow. You are alive. Thought you had been 'reassigned'.

No link. I saw it on Special Report. I think the source was public ploicy something. It doesn't really matter. It surprises no one.

Funny how progressives rush to defend union influence as 'doing the most good'. Then in the next breath, screaming like a child about the money in politics. The money's only well spent if it's to advance your "good" progressive agenda, right Perilosi?

Hey, btw, nice to see you got your butts kicked on that fraudulent healthcare scam. You nearly got away with it. But I know, your clan will keep tryin....

[Peri]

Originally Posted by God Bless America

Wow. You are alive. Thought you had been 'reassigned'.

Nah, just a bit of traveling. The committee wants to keep me right here, although I would love to be posted somewhere warmer. Thanks for asking, though, glad I was missed!

So are you against the ruling? It so hard to search through your bitter little words, GBA. Give it up. Follow Obama's leadership and realize that the cynicism of your party is doing a disservice to the electorate. Ask your Republican handlers to LEAD, if they can. Let them put honest solutions out on the table, if they disagree, rather than sneering, jeering, and frightening people. Like Obama said, if they have a better idea for providing affordable healthcare to Americans, he wants to hear it. And not through Twitter, my friend.

No, I think we liberals should keep trying to get healthcare reform passed. Like Obama said tonight, we won't run.

It was a damn fine speech, didn't you think?

I listened to bit of the Massachusett's senator's rebuttal. Goodness, the man doesn't speak very well, does he? At one point I heard him say "America has tremendous natural resources, and we will use them ALL!" Damn. I think he means it. Let's enjoy the planet, folks, before the Republicans drill it all away.