LGP Political Discussion Thread

[Guinness]

http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/a ... 48038.html

Re: The comment about the Tea Party folks (I don't know or care about what he has to say about Brown): It's hilarious that Olbermann cannot conceive of any opposition to Obama as legitimate. This guy seems to read the Cliff's Notes version of history and current events.

Editorial note: I don't particularly care for David Kramer, but I do agree with him that it is enjoyable to watch the self-righteous Olbermann work himself into a just-below-the-surface froth over Brown's election.

[doublem]

http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/01/21/ ... 0can%20buy" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

How long before we become fully corporatist? I think we are already there.

The Supreme Court has given big business, unions and nonprofits more power to spend freely in federal elections, a major turnaround that threatens a century of government efforts to regulate the power of corporations to bankroll American politics.

[PittPensFan]

http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/01/21/ ... 0can%20buy

How long before we become fully corporatist? I think we are already there.

The Supreme Court has given big business, unions and nonprofits more power to spend freely in federal elections, a major turnaround that threatens a century of government efforts to regulate the power of corporations to bankroll American politics.

Yes, how dare the people in charge of corporations and labor unions spend their money to advocate the elction or defeat of certain candidates? The government cannot ban entities and people from using their money to advocate under the first amendment. Therefore, McCain-Feingold is unconstitutional.

[doublem]

http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/01/21/ ... 0can%20buy

How long before we become fully corporatist? I think we are already there.

The Supreme Court has given big business, unions and nonprofits more power to spend freely in federal elections, a major turnaround that threatens a century of government efforts to regulate the power of corporations to bankroll American politics.

Yes, how dare the people in charge of corporations and labor unions spend their money to advocate the elction or defeat of certain candidates? The government cannot ban entities and people from using their money to advocate under the first amendment. Therefore, McCain-Feingold is unconstitutional.

Well, I guess if you think corporations are considered individuals and have the same rights as individuals but considering that has always been a debated issue and generally thought of as not true, this gives corporations nearly unlimited power to influence the country, another big win for big money, great job government.

[AlexPKeaton]

Well from my understanding the corporations are not allowed to donate money to the candidate, it just allows them air whatever ads they want supporting a candidate.

[PittPensFan]

Well from my understanding the corporations are not allowed to donate money to the candidate, it just allows them air whatever ads they want supporting a candidate.

Exactly. The decision still keeps the direct contribution cap on, but it allows corporations and labor unions and non profits to run political advertisments whenever they want, which in my opinion and the opinion of the Court is permitted under the Constitution.

[doublem]

Well from my understanding the corporations are not allowed to donate money to the candidate, it just allows them air whatever ads they want supporting a candidate.

Exactly. The decision still keeps the direct contribution cap on, but it allows corporations and labor unions and non profits to run political advertisments whenever they want, which in my opinion and the opinion of the Court is permitted under the Constitution.

Where? This rulings lets the pouring of money into advertising which is just as bad as direct a contribution. These ads play a direct result in getting candidates elected and the information that voters get.

[AlexPKeaton]

Well from my understanding the corporations are not allowed to donate money to the candidate, it just allows them air whatever ads they want supporting a candidate.

Exactly. The decision still keeps the direct contribution cap on, but it allows corporations and labor unions and non profits to run political advertisments whenever they want, which in my opinion and the opinion of the Court is permitted under the Constitution.

Where? This rulings lets the pouring of money into advertising which is just as bad as direct a contribution. These ads play a direct result in getting candidates elected and the information that voters get.

Well I assume they still have to say who is purchasing the ad. Therefore that will keep many corporations out. GM isn't going to air a commercial supporting one party because they will alienate 50% of their customers. This effects groups like unions who always go D, NRA who always go R, etc.

[doublem]

They should all be out and alienating 50% of their customers might be a bigger problem than if they sold it Dems vs Rep. becasue just as long as someone sees there company, union or whatever it is a win for them.

[pittsoccer33]

why shouldnt corporations fight for themselves? my industry (finance) is under massive assault by the Obama administration, trying to force taxes and more regulation which will lead to higher costs and lost jobs.

[doublem]

why shouldnt corporations fight for themselves? my industry (finance) is under massive assault by the Obama administration, trying to force taxes and more regulation which will lead to higher costs and lost jobs.

Fight for themselves? They have been winning every major decisions for decades. This isn't a fight, it's a TKO for corporations and this is just another win. If Obama wanted to fight Wall Street he could have done a better job than laying down fight after fight to them. Are you really trying to say tax cuts are the answer here? I mean really?

Edit: and they should be it should stop them from taking massive risks.

[doublem]

That Marxist Obama was on the right of Paul efiing Volcker for a long time.

http://baselinescenario.com/2010/01/20/ ... #more-6108" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Not that any conservative would support this even though they always claim to support "reform"

[Firebird]

So wait.....moveon.org won't be alone in airing commercials anymore?

[pittsoccer33]

we need to keep teaching our kids that life isnt fair. if you don't like the way a corporation operates, buy stock and vote your proxy. how they manage themselves in no one's business but their owners.

theres so much outrage over what bankers make; what about what General Electric is paying Conan to leave. His show wasn't performing, they made a business decision that now includes him leaving. Why does he deserve all that money? Who in the world needs all that money? It isn't fair he is getting all that just to walk away when there are so many people without health insurance! We should tax it at 50% or whatever Obama wants to smack bankers with.

[PittPensFan]

Anything that sends Chuck Schumer into a conniption is OK by me. Schumer, decrying the SCOTUS' decision as un-American (I thought that term was reserved to conservatives) is holding hearings within a couple weeks to try to find new ways to circumvent the ruling.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing- ... t-decision

[doublem]

we need to keep teaching our kids that life isnt fair. if you don't like the way a corporation operates, buy stock and vote your proxy. how they manage themselves in no one's business but their owners.

yea, good solution. When we are teaching the values of life, maybe we can also teach them the value of accountability, like when you mess up, you don't get rewarded. Buying stock in a corporation doesn't really solve the problem of why they exist in the first place, it only makes you part of the problem. Actaully, it is my/our business becasue the massive screw ups/ fraud that they were responsible for and the only reason they haven't been nationalized or sold off is becasue they have massive amounts of tax dollars floating up the giant failures that they are.

[doublem]

what about what General Electric is paying Conan to leave. His show wasn't performing, they made a business decision that now includes him leaving. Why does he deserve all that money? Who in the world needs all that money? It isn't fair he is getting all that just to walk away when there are so many people without health insurance! We should tax it at 50% or whatever Obama wants to smack bankers with.

I don't really know how to answer that besides or

[doublem]

Anything that sends Chuck Schumer into a conniption is OK by me. Schumer, decrying the SCOTUS' decision as un-American (I thought that term was reserved to conservatives) is holding hearings within a couple weeks to try to find new ways to circumvent the ruling.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing- ... t-decision

For fans of democracy or representative republics it is.

[Geezer]

why shouldnt corporations fight for themselves? my industry (finance) is under massive assault by the Obama administration, trying to force taxes and more regulation which will lead to higher costs and lost jobs.

Excellent point. The Dems use their anti-capiltalist rhetoric to gain suppot for big govenment socialistic policies. There's nothing wrong with corporation's ,business group's or small business inidividual's who rely on profit for survival to stick up for themselves. The dems had little trouble raising money with unions, trial lawyers, lefty organizations like the ACLU, sugar daddies like Soros, and money laundering scam groups bankrolling them. Obama raised much more money than McCain (which prompted him to break his first campaign promise of public financing). The mainsteam networks that cheeleaded for Obama are also corporations.

The left didn't mind the corporate ad campaigns for Obama care from corp's and groups like the AMA that cut deals with the WH. The drug companies were guaranteed no competition from Canada, insurance companies were protected from interstate competition, AARP got their own piece of the pie. The crocdile tears from the left is as hypocritical as it is predicatable.

[doublem]

Excellent point. The Dems use their anti-capiltalist rhetoric to gain suppot for big govenment socialistic policies.

Nothing to do with capitalism.

There's nothing wrong with corporation's ,business group's or small business inidividual's who rely on profit for survival to stick up for themselves

Are these people defenseless or something, not last time I checked.

The left didn't mind the corporate ad campaigns for Obama care from corp's and groups like the AMA that cut deals with the WH.

Not true, for me anyways.

The drug companies were guaranteed no competition from Canada, insurance companies were protected from interstate competition, AARP got their own piece of the pie.

Which is the problem.

[Geezer]

New on the Haiti front. Hugo Chavez has claimed that the U.S. Navy caused the Haitian eathquake by testing new weapons off the cost of Haiti. Per Hugo these weapons are being developed for the U.S. to destroy Iran with a series of earthquakes. I'm not making this up.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,583588,00.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Firebird]

CABLE NEWS RACE TUES. JAN. 19,
FOXNEWS HANNITY 6,809,000
FOXNEWS GRETA 6,399,000
FOXNEWS O'REILLY 5,228,000
FOXNEWS BECK 3,446,000
FOXNEWS BAIER 3,338,000
FOXNEWS SHEP 3,241,000
CNN KING 1,681,000
CNN COOPER 1,508,000
CNN BROWN 1,308,000
MSNBC OLBERMANN 1,274,000
MSNBC MADDOW 1,236,000
CNN BLITZER 1,135,000
CNNHN BEHAR 845,000
MSNBC HARDBALL 798,000

[Gaucho]

I'm not making this up.

Neither does Chavez. Or so he says.

[HomerPenguin]

Yes, how dare the people in charge of corporations and labor unions spend their money to advocate the elction or defeat of certain candidates?

They've always been allowed to use their own money to advocate the election or defeat of whomever they wanted. It's using the corporation's money that's been banned.

The government cannot ban entities and people from using their money to advocate under the first amendment.

"Entities" aren't protected under the Bill of Rights, or at least they never used to be. I hope we move on to give corporations the right to bear arms next.

[HomerPenguin]

Well from my understanding the corporations are not allowed to donate money to the candidate, it just allows them air whatever ads they want supporting a candidate.

There's a distinction without meaning if I ever heard one.