RE: Welcome to the United Corporation Of States

RE: Welcome to the United Corporation Of States (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Thadius -> RE: Welcome to the United Corporation Of States (1/22/2010 10:14:44 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery Hi Thadius, Yeah, and if we can use work for political purposes, I should teach classes this year about whom they should elect, grading them on their knowledge of the proper candidates' achievements and goals, right? And since teachers can buy stuff for class w/o sales tax, backers can funnel their money through me and we'll get them all the campaign stuff they need. [Before someone jumps on the liberal bias thing, incidentally, not a one of my students could tell you a thing about my political/social views--that's neither my job nor my place.] I'd love to see libel laws and truth in advertising restrictions apply to campaign ads. That would never pass muster with the Supreme Court, and it's probably effectively unenforceable anyway, but it sure would speak to one main root of the problem. Tim Tim, Many tenured professors already do use their classes to advocate for particular issues, parties and candidates. Besides that, the unions do a pretty good job of getting particular messages out for the teachers. Hell I am not even saying that those are bad things, I am just saying there has to be a better way of balancing the voice of the people with those of other entities, and I just don't know where that balancing point falls. Oh, just as an example about teachers pushing particular candidates or policies just look at some of the videos that came out of classes singing praises to our current president. As always, Thadius

Musicmystery -> RE: Welcome to the United Corporation Of States (1/22/2010 10:27:56 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Thadius quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery Hi Thadius, Yeah, and if we can use work for political purposes, I should teach classes this year about whom they should elect, grading them on their knowledge of the proper candidates' achievements and goals, right? And since teachers can buy stuff for class w/o sales tax, backers can funnel their money through me and we'll get them all the campaign stuff they need. [Before someone jumps on the liberal bias thing, incidentally, not a one of my students could tell you a thing about my political/social views--that's neither my job nor my place.] I'd love to see libel laws and truth in advertising restrictions apply to campaign ads. That would never pass muster with the Supreme Court, and it's probably effectively unenforceable anyway, but it sure would speak to one main root of the problem. Tim Tim, Many tenured professors already do use their classes to advocate for particular issues, parties and candidates. Besides that, the unions do a pretty good job of getting particular messages out for the teachers. Hell I am not even saying that those are bad things, I am just saying there has to be a better way of balancing the voice of the people with those of other entities, and I just don't know where that balancing point falls. Oh, just as an example about teachers pushing particular candidates or policies just look at some of the videos that came out of classes singing praises to our current president. As always, Thadius Hi Thadius, There's a world of difference between anecdotal stories and common practice. People's reliance on the former fosters myth. I'm in this environment consistently these days. It's not there. It's just not there. Faculty are far more concerned with course discipline content and their area of research. We can certainly point to a number of instances of clergy preaching politics to the faithful. Does that mean churches are using tax-exempt status to foster political activities? No. It means a few have done that. Most churches are focused on the reason they formed in the first place, to worship the God of their choice. I actually went to a driver safety course taught by an ex-conservative candidate. The entire six hours was filled with conservative politics. Never again--I'll just go elsewhere, to the sessions where this is not the case. Live well, Tim

mnottertail -> RE: Welcome to the United Corporation Of States (1/22/2010 10:35:28 AM)
Yes, there must be someone on this planet who hasnt been inundated with the candidates polished and spun message, and now the unlimited ability to bring distorted messages and soundbites to a overwhelming number of joe six packs that lack any sort of political acumen, will further enhance the free speech of america. So, for almost everyone who is sick of hipshootting selfserving special interest and lobby money soaked legislatures and affiliates, it is of good cheer that thru capitalism we can now shout down anyone who doesnt toe the party line of the corporation (fuck an individual) and only pocketbooks will be heard. Shades of the third reich. This was not the freedom of speech intended by the founding fathers, nor is this the freedom of speech intoned by the conservatives in the ballot counting issues 'one voice, one vote' so recently. this is not the freedom of speech ..............you get the idea....... This does not help break the barriers if distance between the people and thier representatives, does not help bring light to real issues that affect us all, it brings only heat, and brings us closer to---- Ein Volk, ein Reich, ein Führer --- something we as Americans have always said was not an american way of life. The massive multi-national corporation is the individual. Turn in your birth certificates. This is a fuckin travesty. Ron

Thadius -> RE: Welcome to the United Corporation Of States (1/22/2010 10:46:46 AM)
Tim, I was referring to much of my classload over the past 3 semesters. Perhaps, I was just unlucky in the instructors that were available during my scheduling. I would concede that much of the conceptions that this is the status quo is based on anecdotes, and probably is not the majority of professors out there. On the clergy side of things, I find myself wrestling with this topic quite a bit. As I prepare a message I have to weigh how much or how specific I am about a particular issue, and if it will or won't put me in violation of the tax-exempt restrictions. Even when a political topic seems to be very important to me and the church (the folks that attend), I do my damndest to seperate the message from any political endorsements of a given candidate. My personal opinion sometimes needs to be expressed in a way that the congregation knows that it is my personal opinion and nothing more. In that light I have setup weekly coffee chats, we get together enjoy some refreshments (away from the church) and discuss concerns, politics, or anything else that is on anyones mind. My condolences on the course, it sounds like it would have been torture. Live well my friend, Thadius

Nosathro -> RE: Welcome to the United Corporation Of States (1/22/2010 10:52:22 AM)
There is many cases of corperations attempting to use large sums of money that they have to get what they want from government, in many cases the corperations action are illegal, not in the public interests and done for corperate gain. This court has shown who side it is on, remember the intermate domain ruling? The Supreme Court only provided what Shakesphere has said long ago.."If you want justice, the first thing you do is shot the lawyers". Coming to your home soon The Johnston County Wars, The Next Generation.

Musicmystery -> RE: Welcome to the United Corporation Of States (1/22/2010 10:54:46 AM)
quote: My condolences on the course, it sounds like it would have been torture. Live well my friend, Thadius It was. There's a reason we didn't elect him! Tim

philosophy -> RE: Welcome to the United Corporation Of States (1/22/2010 11:19:58 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Thadius I am just saying there has to be a better way of balancing the voice of the people with those of other entities, and I just don't know where that balancing point falls. ....eminently sensible approach. i'd suggest that the best way to find that balancing point would be to start small and wrok up, until you get to the point where the size and economic power of the entity drowns out individual voices. Then you'd have found the balance point. So, find out what the effects of a ten person entity are. A small business. Then a business that does work county-wide, then state-wide, then maybe nationally. What you don't do is what the SCOTUS have done, which is start at the biggest possible entity.

DomKen -> RE: Welcome to the United Corporation Of States (1/22/2010 12:31:10 PM)
After reading the ruling completely is how the justices completely fail to address is why a corporation now has more speech rights than an individual. An idividual is limited in his expenditures in favor of one candidate but a corporation is not. very troubling.

DomKen -> RE: Welcome to the United Corporation Of States (1/22/2010 12:42:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Thadius So what limits should be in place on the opinions or speech of a corporation? Where do we set the lines? Which types of corporations should such limits apply to? Are those limits going to be based on gross or net receipts, or possibly based on the sector? We already had quite good rules in place. Commercial speech was basically uncontrolled with the same limits a person has to operate under, primarily stuff like not impinging on other entities intelectual property and not defaming others. Outside of that a corporation should have no right to speech. Specifically no rights to political speech at all. No lobbying and certainly no advocacy for or against a candidate. quote: I completely understand the desire to try and keep corps (US and international) out of the purchasing a seat for the candidate they feel will best suit their bottom lines or agendas. I further understand the arguments from the other side about not limiting any political speech. For the record, I wrestle with both of these issues on a much smaller basis as I have to worry about what I say or handout and how it may harm my incorporated church's tax exempt status. I know it's a different issue but the effect is still the same. My speech, and the speech of my corporation are limited based on laws passed by Congress, which is why these cases are of interest to me. Your church's tax status will only be affected by your political speech if you mingle your political speech with your official activty for the church. So far the IRS has held that to mean endorsing candidates from the pulpit or in some other venue where it would appear that you are speaking officially for the church. Which honestly is fine with me. If you want to be exempt from paying taxes then stay out of politics. We'd be a lot better off if that line was a lot more clearly delineated and enforced.

pahunkboy -> RE: Welcome to the United Corporation Of States (1/22/2010 3:47:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen After reading the ruling completely is how the justices completely fail to address is why a corporation now has more speech rights than an individual. An idividual is limited in his expenditures in favor of one candidate but a corporation is not. very troubling. The idea of a constitutional amendment to fix this --- might work.

Musicmystery -> RE: Welcome to the United Corporation Of States (1/22/2010 3:49:27 PM)
Constitutional Amendments are very difficult to ratify. On this issue, it will never happen.

MzMia -> RE: Welcome to the United Corporation Of States (1/22/2010 3:50:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: subrob1967 This changes what exactly? The only difference now is big ____ doesn't have to hide their contributions any longer. Dems have big labor, the Repubs have big business...Same ole same ole. I really don't see any big revelations or changes either, you have to be in someone's pocket to be elected, these days. What else is new under the sun?

AnimusRex -> RE: Welcome to the United Corporation Of States (1/22/2010 3:52:43 PM)
At the moment, Republicans are expected to benefit from the corporate cash windfall. But I wonder how many have reflected on how much corporate America will spend to ensure that the supply of illegal aliens remains unobstructed, in this year's immigration reform bill?

Musicmystery -> RE: Welcome to the United Corporation Of States (1/22/2010 3:56:09 PM)
I just came back from the store. I gave me a warm, fuzzy feeling inside to know that with each purchase, I was helping American democracy and free speech. I wonder if we'll have Democrat, Republican, and Independent products now?

Jeffff -> RE: Welcome to the United Corporation Of States (1/22/2010 3:58:17 PM)
opps... wrong thread...:)

MzMia -> RE: Welcome to the United Corporation Of States (1/22/2010 4:00:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: AnimusRex At the moment, Republicans are expected to benefit from the corporate cash windfall. But I wonder how many have reflected on how much corporate America will spend to ensure that the supply of illegal aliens remains unobstructed, in this year's immigration reform bill? ssshhhhh don't tell the secret. Many don't realize it is the Republicans that seriously back and want illegal aliens here. We are supposed to think it is the good hearted Democrats. [;)]

AnimusRex -> RE: Welcome to the United Corporation Of States (1/22/2010 4:00:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery I wonder if we'll have Democrat, Republican, and Independent products now? I like the idea of our Senators and Congressmen wearing NASCAR jumpsuits, emblazoned with all the logos of their corporate sponsors. this way we can tell who is owned by whom.

Musicmystery -> RE: Welcome to the United Corporation Of States (1/22/2010 4:02:36 PM)
Better yet, why not just hire someone to run? It will eliminate lobbyists--all that can be handled by employee memos.

MrRodgers -> RE: Welcome to the United Corporation Of States (1/22/2010 7:59:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: housesub4you Well, it looks like it is going to be corruption on steroids in politics from now on. The SC ruled today allowing Corporations to spend unlimited funds on campaigns. http://thinkprogress.org/2010/01/21/gop-citizens-united/ In response to the GOP being overjoyed For a party that professes itself to adhere to the Constitution and worship the “founding fathers” so much, I guess they missed when Thomas Jefferson said, “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 bid defiance to the laws of our country.” ...or Lincoln: ""I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country. . . . corporations have been enthroned and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until all wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed." or Jefferson again: Letter to James Madison (30 January 1787); referring to Shay's Rebellion. "God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion. The people cannot be all, and always, well informed. The part which is wrong will be discontented, in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions, it is lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty."

cuckyman -> RE: Welcome to the United Corporation Of States (1/23/2010 12:27:28 PM)
If you don't like a company...don't buy their product...simple... Corporations are owned and controlled by the shareholders who own them...the American people.... Obviously you communist types hate corportations, or any form of free enterprise as best I can figure, and it shows. Well, guess what....with unemployment being what it is....people are very PRO American business at the moment and you socialist types are losing influence every day....big time. So soon, it really won't matter what the hell you think about anything....vote and live and let live..... we don't want to hear more big blowhard lib bloviations and railings against American commerce..... Corporations have killed far fewer people in this world than liberal dictators all over the planet.... Go straighten out North Korea, and then after you have shown socialisim actually works somewhere, then make your case...until then.... I think the rest of us would appreciate less lame blowhard lib crap.... it only tells people how dumb and confused you are..... trust me.... don't believe me...go into any small town and start running that Obama crap and you will be escorted to the city limits....by a host of people that just don't want to hear about it.... got it?

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125