Absolutely. This is more about avoiding having to go trough workarounds than anything else.
Enron was a criminal case.
Libel, while there's a criminal figure for it on certain states, is rarely prosecuted because it directly clashes with first amendment rights.
Lying on an ad is mostly a civil case, period.
Absolutely. This is more about avoiding having to go trough workarounds than anything else.
Well? Are they or aren't they, SouthernFried?Are trade unions made up of ordinary US citizens?
For profit corps are organized for business.
Labor unions are organized for workers.
I don't see a need for either to be engaged in political advocacy.
Allow political advocacy groups with only contributions from individual citizens.
I think that commie Rehnquist had something to say on this subject once upon a time.
Nice to see the argument settle on the meaning of US citizenship, instead of abstract individualism for a change.
No surprise that we have a government responsive to "stakeholders" (ie big bidness & big labor) instead of individuals.
Of course, that's the theory these days. Your self-worth is determined by group membership and not your own intrinsic individuality.
"your chartered to do business...not politics"
lol
"People chartered to do biz, are supposed to be disallowed from being involved in politics?"
I blame public education on this. Business is almost off limits to the public education system...promoting ignorance, breeding distrust, resulting in hatred.
Ignorance is the enemy, and our "education" system wallows in it. The results are endemic throughout the country.
From "elections are special and need free speech curtailed during them" to "Corporations are synthetic people," to "business chartered to do business, are not charted to be involved in politics" to the totally obscure "are trade unions US citizens? Are they, huh...huh...huh?"
lol
It's gotta be 5 o'clock somewhere...
sig
"They are composed of ordinary US citizens" was your argument for the Cons utional rights of corporations, dummy.
BTW, I notice you just dodged my direct question at the top of the page. Others will notice, too.
Nothing obscure about it, SouthernFried. I guess calling it that consoles you for your pitiful obfuscation and dodging.
'You're a dummy because you disagree with me.' Compelling argument.
Further, since SF obviously went to the special school, in which part of the Cons ution are rights explicitly given to business organizations?
Further evidence of his exceptional education.
I blame American public education for people gullible enough to swallow that a Fortune 500 company should enjoy cons utional protections originally intended for private citizens.
So does this ruling also make it easier for foreign corporations to make political donations?
@MB: Ironic, since SF blames "public education" for you and me believing any different.
A wager on which century he would place the SCOTUS recognition of a corporation as a person under the Cons ution? Not to mention if he could figure out which amendment was involved?
lol...we having fun yet?
Actually, you brought the "US citizen" into this discussion. I was using "ordinary people" until that point. I'm sure you had some diabolical reason for trying to switch it...mebbe because some Non-US-citizens can create a corporation? I dunno, paranoid mebbe...but, don't care really. Fit in US citizen all u want.
What is your question? Something about Trade union people being normal US citizens?? If they are US trade unions, and are normal US citizens...I would think they would be...uh, normal US citizens.
Is that somehow connected to Corporations being made of people as well?
Yeah. It has to do with your abject apology for the big business/ big labor stranglehold on electoral politics, and the recent SC decision so amenable to both.
Especially when you consider the purpose of that system.
Standard knee-jerk Dittohead responses:
Pro-Bidness no matter what. Any deviation from the worship of American bidness is a sign of latent communism. The Founding Fathers had no such skepticism about the power business interests could attain and its potential impact upon the Republic, specifically, the rights and liberties of individual citizens.
Criticize the government reflexively. Blame the first government en y which comes to mind, excepting the military, of course. Oh, and the police.
Then gulp your Bud, head to the bathroom, and jack off.
lol
The people behind and in the fortune 500 company probably should enjoy the same cons utional protections as...uh...y'know..."private citizens."
We have agreed that corporations don't exist without people right? And that every corporation has...uh...people. That people create and run corporations...and every corporation has to have people listed on the corporate charter? And that a corporation is not just some creation of a ...er, non-person? And that those people have just as much right to do what, people do...as much as, well..."normal" people not involved in a "corporation" do?
We do have this much straight, right?
WOuldn't duh guvmint be better if bidness ran it? Tink about it, man!
I drink MGD. lol
And if you look, real hard...the founders biggest skepticism...was about the increase power of govt. Specifically, the rights and liberties of individual citizens...
....even those citizens involved in "Corporations."
lol
Dude!!!
I been saying that for years! Take the CEO's of the most "successful" business and corporations, put them in charge of the mess in DC.
...and we talking balanced budgets, cutting waste, decreased beaurocracies.
"successful" US business is the key here.
GM CEO's not allowed.
Great Idea man!! Great minds and all that....
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)