Reply With Quote
You may disregard the levity. It was never intended in earnest.
A misfired bit of levity, apparently. I have recomposed myself.
You may disregard the levity. It was never intended in earnest.
The frame was the comment above it.
Rugged American individualism and entrepreneurial vigor is giving GE and friends a change to Section 5 Subsection 4 paragraph iii item 26 line 23 of the federal tax code.
I enjoyed it. Is quite fitting. "Conservatives" today on the very entrepreneurs who serve as backdrops for GOP candidate photo ops.
For the uninitiated, refers to what please?Section 5 Subsection 4 paragraph iii item 26 line 23 of the federal tax code
No idea. I made it up, but I wouldn't be surprised to learn that it actually exists.
However, one could plausibly run a successful political campaign based on doing away with it in these United States, regardless of its actual existence.
Maybe the end of all of this is to kick back and enjoy the show.
Some show.
Fish swimming, mouth open.
That is just wrong to do to my High School mascot:
Wahoo!
You might want to look up news citations for Mr. James Bopp on the particulars.
I note with amusement his knock-on crusade: removing disclosure requirements.
Last edited by Winehole23; 01-27-2010 at 02:56 AM.
Mr. Bopp said the next step in his 10-year plan is to roll back the disclosure rules.
“Groups have to be relieved of reporting their donors if lifting the prohibition on their political speech is going to have any meaning,” he said.
.”http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2010/...-reminder.htmlRequiring groups that buy political commercials to report their donors is almost as punitive, he said, “as an outright criminal go-to-jail-time prohibition
Last edited by Winehole23; 01-27-2010 at 03:04 AM.
You know, I can see this.
I just don't think very many people actually care about it beneath all their solidly constructed armature related to caring about it.
In nuce, the corporation is no longer a mere concessionaire of the various states, in Federal law it is like a guy.
It has federally enforceable free speech rights now... as if it ever substantially lacked them before. That's what I don't get.
Last edited by Winehole23; 01-27-2010 at 10:06 PM.
In Europe, I think -- in France, for sure -- it is a crime to insult a product. Maybe we're gonna start being more like them now.
That French guy who called beaujolais nouveau vin de merde and was threatened with punitive damages for the slur by the growers.
Words similar to this sunk Clayton Williams against Ann Richards.
Alito..
...the traitor is saying 'that's not true' while shaking his head
Notice how everyone avoided that stinky fish bait, Dan?
Alito is not a traitor for shaking his head and visibly muttering. Saying so is bush league.
Totally bush.
Some bush leaguers milk a Holstein cow in Visalia during Holstein Days.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
