IMHO, this might be the most important Supreme Court ruling ever made by our government.
I still can't believe this thing passed without talk of a revolution.
of course we also overturned the Voter's rights act this year so...
i'm fairly sure the majority of america has no idea the Pandora's box that we have opened.
every time i think about the nightmare scenarios in our future as a result of this decision my head explodes. :shakehead:
discuss.
Quote from: VA $l!m on March 27, 2014, 01:18:42 AM
IMHO, this might be the most important Supreme Court ruling ever made by our government.
I still can't believe this thing passed without talk of a revolution.
of course we also overturned the Voter's rights act this year so...
i'm fairly sure the majority of america has no idea the Pandora's box that we have opened.
every time i think about the nightmare scenarios in our future as a result of this decision my head explodes. :shakehead:
discuss.
Most Americans are dumb. Its sad...
Terry
Quote from: twatts on March 27, 2014, 01:32:14 AM
Quote from: VA $l!m on March 27, 2014, 01:18:42 AM
IMHO, this might be the most important Supreme Court ruling ever made by our government.
I still can't believe this thing passed without talk of a revolution.
of course we also overturned the Voter's rights act this year so...
i'm fairly sure the majority of america has no idea the Pandora's box that we have opened.
every time i think about the nightmare scenarios in our future as a result of this decision my head explodes. :shakehead:
discuss.
Most Americans are dumb. Its sad...
Terry
yes and yes.
personally i cant wait to have to get my food stamps approved by Walmart and then be able to choose between coke or pepsi for president. :roll:
Seriously though, the current hobby lobby case is looking like it might even pass. which is insane.
i thought maybe after the Arizona nonsense maybe people were taking some notice how ridiculous this precedent was in practical application, but apparently not.
&
the 2012 election was just the tip of the iceberg in relation to how CU effects campaign contributions.
its only going to get worse, much worse.
you should see the bananas million dollar BS local campaigns backed by corps. we are getting here in my conservative state.
its disgusting.
if you still believe elected officials are actual representatives and not purely corporate pawns then you are fooling yourself.
its amazing that 20 years ago i thought playing sci-fi RPGs about post apocalyptic earth ran by corporations was fantasy, yet now goldman Sachs is stockpiling uranium.
It's sad. And it's likely to get worse... (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCutcheon_v._Federal_Election_Commission)
We need to be moving towards public financing, yet we're pushing it further in the wrong direction.
Quote from: ytowndan on March 27, 2014, 02:17:07 AM
It's sad. And it's likely to get worse... (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCutcheon_v._Federal_Election_Commission)
We need to be moving towards public financing, yet we're pushing it further in the wrong direction.
exactly.
CU is just a foundation.
it really is spinning out of control in such a short time frame that it is going to be too late to do anything about before the general public actually realize what is happening.
one of the worst parts is that corporations arent only being given rights as individuals and using money as free speach, but then they can avoid penalties and prosecutions that individuals cannot.
Quote from: VA $l!m on March 27, 2014, 02:33:59 AM
one of the worst parts is that corporations arent only being given rights as individuals and using money as free speach, but then they can avoid penalties and prosecutions that individuals cannot.
Yeah, that's a lovely irony isn't it. When corporations break the law usually no individuals get held criminally liable. The company may pay a penalty that amounts to a tiny fraction of a percentage of its assets. (Contrast that to an individual who could go bankrupt merely hiring an attorney to defend against some petty shit.) Of course that simply gets passed on to the consumer in the end -- company's gotta still make its money. Or maybe the entire U.S. taxpaying public gets together to bail companies out for their malfeasance. No biggie.
Quote from: twatts on March 27, 2014, 01:32:14 AM
Quote from: VA $l!m on March 27, 2014, 01:18:42 AM
IMHO, this might be the most important Supreme Court ruling ever made by our government.
I still can't believe this thing passed without talk of a revolution.
of course we also overturned the Voter's rights act this year so...
i'm fairly sure the majority of america has no idea the Pandora's box that we have opened.
every time i think about the nightmare scenarios in our future as a result of this decision my head explodes. :shakehead:
discuss.
Most Americans are dumb. Its sad...
Can you explain it to me? I guess I'm one of the dumb ones.
Quote from: VA $l!m on March 27, 2014, 01:44:24 AM
personally i cant wait to have to get my food stamps approved by Walmart and then be able to choose between coke or pepsi for president. :roll:
Walmart (along with McD's) is the biggest welfare queen in the country (http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-mh-walmarts-dependence-20140324,0,5452260.story). If they were approving your food stamps, you'd be getting a raise.
Quote from: VA $l!m on March 27, 2014, 01:57:35 AM
the 2012 election was just the tip of the iceberg in relation to how CU effects campaign contributions.
Remind me who won that one again?
Quote from: VA $l!m on March 27, 2014, 01:57:35 AM
its amazing that 20 years ago i thought playing sci-fi RPGs about post apocalyptic earth ran by corporations was fantasy, yet now goldman Sachs is stockpiling uranium.
If it makes you feel any better, Goldman is selling their uranium trading desk (http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/02/11/us-goldman-uranium-insight-idUSBREA1A0RX20140211), which they only had to manipulate the price of the commodity anyway. But with the heightened scrutiny on financial cos. following countless manipulation scandals (LIBOR, energy, foreign exchange rates, basically the lifeblood of the financial system), they thought it best to get out lest they get a slap on the wrist.
Quote from: ytowndan on March 27, 2014, 02:17:07 AM
It's sad. And it's likely to get worse... (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCutcheon_v._Federal_Election_Commission)
We need to be moving towards public financing, yet we're pushing it further in the wrong direction.
I still don't understand why you think public financing would make any bit of difference. Politicians aren't influenced by donations as much as they are by lobbyists, and publicly financed campaigns would do nothing to address this. Donors get appointed ambassadorships, they don't have nearly as much influence on policy as you seem to believe they do.
Quote from: VA $l!m on March 27, 2014, 02:33:59 AM
one of the worst parts is that corporations arent only being given rights as individuals and using money as free speach...
Corporate donations since CU are virtually nonexistent (http://www.politico.com/story/2014/01/citizens-united-four-years-later-102449.html). The explosion in donations has come from individuals. And watching Sheldon Adelson dump $100M into various losing candidates over the course of the 2012 campaign should bring a smile to the face of even the most avowed CU hater.
Quote from: VA $l!m on March 27, 2014, 02:33:59 AM
...but then they can avoid penalties and prosecutions that individuals cannot.
I could not agree more.
oh man, i knew this was gonna get jimbo all riled up and out of semi-retirement.
Serenity now
Quote from: runawayjimbo on March 27, 2014, 10:52:39 PM
Quote from: twatts on March 27, 2014, 01:32:14 AM
Quote from: VA $l!m on March 27, 2014, 01:18:42 AM
IMHO, this might be the most important Supreme Court ruling ever made by our government.
I still can't believe this thing passed without talk of a revolution.
of course we also overturned the Voter's rights act this year so...
i'm fairly sure the majority of america has no idea the Pandora's box that we have opened.
every time i think about the nightmare scenarios in our future as a result of this decision my head explodes. :shakehead:
discuss.
Most Americans are dumb. Its sad...
Can you explain it to me? I guess I'm one of the dumb ones.
Duh, I don't know... I'm right along there with you... It just sounded really bad...
Terry
i think someone didnt get their decoder ring in the mail.
:|
Quote from: runawayjimbo on March 27, 2014, 10:52:39 PM
Quote from: ytowndan on March 27, 2014, 02:17:07 AM
It's sad. And it's likely to get worse... (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCutcheon_v._Federal_Election_Commission)
We need to be moving towards public financing, yet we're pushing it further in the wrong direction.
I still don't understand why you think public financing would make any bit of difference. Politicians aren't influenced by donations as much as they are by lobbyists, and publicly financed campaigns would do nothing to address this. Donors get appointed ambassadorships, they don't have nearly as much influence on policy as you seem to believe they do.
They absolutely do. The lobbying/advocacy groups are funded by the same millionaires, billionaires, and corporations who fund the campaigns to begin with. That's where their power comes from. The PACs get you in office and, once you're there, their lobbying arm will provide you with "model bills" to submit to committee. If you tell a lobbyist to go fuck himself, or vote the "wrong" way on a bill, you just guaranteed yourself a primary challenge from a puppet with the same bottomless war chest that used to be on your side. With public financing, the donors and their lobbying groups will no longer have the carrot or the stick.
ETA: BTW... Wouldn't it be great if Nancy Pelosi, Al Franken, and Elizibeth Warren didn't have to email you 100 times a week to ask for three bucks? :wink:
BTW, my purpose here was simply to spark a conversation...
therefore i'm not inclined to dissect quote-monsterss, yet i did see one point id like to comment on the part about individual donations being the focus and not corporations.
from where i stand at least most of these "individuals" are just fronts for much shadier alliances with invasive purposes in many cases.
...you in fact seemed to have supported my point in a round about way.
most "individuals" with billions of dollars to their own name are in fact in cahoots with MULTIPLE corporations, which is even scarier that a single specific business or coalition.
---AND__ I feel I & I should be a little more transparent before someone gets upset in here and takes a post in a miniscule private phish forum amongst friends too seriously---
>>If you CANNOT translate Sliminese word for word i would suggest Not reading it word for word<<<
TASTE dont swallow.
respect and blessing.
Quote from: ytowndan on March 28, 2014, 02:53:01 AM
Quote from: runawayjimbo on March 27, 2014, 10:52:39 PM
Quote from: ytowndan on March 27, 2014, 02:17:07 AM
It's sad. And it's likely to get worse... (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCutcheon_v._Federal_Election_Commission)
We need to be moving towards public financing, yet we're pushing it further in the wrong direction.
I still don't understand why you think public financing would make any bit of difference. Politicians aren't influenced by donations as much as they are by lobbyists, and publicly financed campaigns would do nothing to address this. Donors get appointed ambassadorships, they don't have nearly as much influence on policy as you seem to believe they do.
They absolutely do. The lobbying/advocacy groups are funded by the same millionaires, billionaires, and corporations who fund the campaigns to begin with. That's where their power comes from. The PACs get you in office and, once you're there, their lobbying arm will provide you with "model bills" to submit to committee. If you tell a lobbyist to go fuck himself, or vote the "wrong" way on a bill, you just guaranteed yourself a primary challenge from a puppet with the same bottomless war chest that used to be on your side. With public financing, the donors and their lobbying groups will no longer have the carrot or the stick.
ETA: BTW... Wouldn't it be great if Nancy Pelosi, Al Franken, and Elizibeth Warren didn't have to email you 100 times a week to ask for three bucks? :wink:
Sure, but if you take away donations, what's to stop other, more overt forms of corruption from springing up? PACs could morph into "grassroots" organizations or they could just start straight up buying people. At the end of the day, there are plenty of ways to push their agendas on people. Taking away all that money they spend on ads might work until they can figure out how to put those millions to work in new "legal" avenues. I guess I just don't see how a publicly financed campaign could ever stop special interests from trying to get those in power to do their bidding. And how those in power would do anything but try to hold onto that power for as long as they possibly can.
Thankfully, I am not on those lists. :wink: Although I do still get calls from DCCC and OFA every once in a while. I usually start by congratulating them because they are about to get on a training call for how to handle an uncooperative caller.
Quote from: VA $l!m on March 28, 2014, 12:05:45 PM
BTW, my purpose here was simply to spark a conversation...
therefore i'm not inclined to dissect quote-monsterss, yet i did see one point id like to comment on the part about individual donations being the focus and not corporations.
from where i stand at least most of these "individuals" are just fronts for much shadier alliances with invasive purposes in many cases.
...you in fact seemed to have supported my point in a round about way.
most "individuals" with billions of dollars to their own name are in fact in cahoots with MULTIPLE corporations, which is even scarier that a single specific business or coalition.
---AND__ I feel I & I should be a little more transparent before someone gets upset in here and takes a post in a miniscule private phish forum amongst friends too seriously---
>>If you CANNOT translate Sliminese word for word i would suggest Not reading it word for word<<<
TASTE dont swallow.
respect and blessing.
Sorry, I didn't have time to weigh in during the day but there were a number of points made that I wanted to respond to. I enjoy the discussion even though I more often than not represent the opposite POV of many people around here. I didn't get upset and I definitely don't take too a whole lot seriously.
Quote from: runawayjimbo on March 28, 2014, 05:36:35 PM
Quote from: ytowndan on March 28, 2014, 02:53:01 AM
Quote from: runawayjimbo on March 27, 2014, 10:52:39 PM
Quote from: ytowndan on March 27, 2014, 02:17:07 AM
It's sad. And it's likely to get worse... (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCutcheon_v._Federal_Election_Commission)
We need to be moving towards public financing, yet we're pushing it further in the wrong direction.
I still don't understand why you think public financing would make any bit of difference. Politicians aren't influenced by donations as much as they are by lobbyists, and publicly financed campaigns would do nothing to address this. Donors get appointed ambassadorships, they don't have nearly as much influence on policy as you seem to believe they do.
They absolutely do. The lobbying/advocacy groups are funded by the same millionaires, billionaires, and corporations who fund the campaigns to begin with. That's where their power comes from. The PACs get you in office and, once you're there, their lobbying arm will provide you with "model bills" to submit to committee. If you tell a lobbyist to go fuck himself, or vote the "wrong" way on a bill, you just guaranteed yourself a primary challenge from a puppet with the same bottomless war chest that used to be on your side. With public financing, the donors and their lobbying groups will no longer have the carrot or the stick.
ETA: BTW... Wouldn't it be great if Nancy Pelosi, Al Franken, and Elizibeth Warren didn't have to email you 100 times a week to ask for three bucks? :wink:
Sure, but if you take away donations, what's to stop other, more overt forms of corruption from springing up? PACs could morph into "grassroots" organizations or they could just start straight up buying people. At the end of the day, there are plenty of ways to push their agendas on people. Taking away all that money they spend on ads might work until they can figure out how to put those millions to work in new "legal" avenues. I guess I just don't see how a publicly financed campaign could ever stop special interests from trying to get those in power to do their bidding. And how those in power would do anything but try to hold onto that power for as long as they possibly can.
Thankfully, I am not on those lists. :wink: Although I do still get calls from DCCC and OFA every once in a while. I usually start by congratulating them because they are about to get on a training call for how to handle an uncooperative caller.
I agree that people will always try to find a new way to game the system. And, eventually, they'll succeed with their new methods (for as long as we allow it). But using that as an argument to do nothing is kinda like making "the perfect the enemy of the good."
Quote from: ytowndan on March 28, 2014, 08:35:30 PM
I agree that people will always try to find a new way to game the system. And, eventually, they'll succeed with their new methods (for as long as we allow it). But using that as an argument to do nothing is kinda like making "the perfect the enemy of the good."
Oh don't worry, I have plenty of other problems with public financing (shocking!), that was just the one at issue. :wink:
I also object to being forced to support a viewpoint with which I disagree. I believe it is my 1st amendment right to spend my money as I choose, including (especially?) to endorse a political belief. And I believe that public financing provides the incumbent a structural advantage that is nearly insurmountable, which would result in re-election rates as high/higher than they are today. The complacency in Washington is already, IMO, a significant cause of our current problems. I don't want to make it even easier for these fuckers to get re-elected.
For all of the apocryphal rhetoric, the most meaningful impact of CU (thus far) has been to make races at all levels more competitive. To me, that makes the CU decision an unbridled success.
i dont think i can stomach this one anymore. :oops:
it was fun while it lasted phellas. :-)
see ya in teh other forums.
Quote from: VA $l!m on March 29, 2014, 03:04:54 AM
i dont think i can stomach this one anymore. :oops:
it was fun while it lasted phellas. :-)
see ya in teh other forums.
Oh, so when you said you wanted to "spark a conversation" what you meant was you wanted to throw out a bunch of scary sounding opinions - some of which are not supported by the facts - and see who could agree with you the hardest? That doesn't sound like much of a conversation to me but whatever. My bad.
You're not getting upset now, are you jimbo?
(http://www.tacomaworld.com/gallery/data/500/This-Thread-Sucks-Zoidberg.jpg)
Quote from: runawayjimbo on March 29, 2014, 07:15:10 AM
Quote from: VA $l!m on March 29, 2014, 03:04:54 AM
i dont think i can stomach this one anymore. :oops:
it was fun while it lasted phellas. :-)
see ya in teh other forums.
Oh, so when you said you wanted to "spark a conversation" what you meant was you wanted to throw out a bunch of scary sounding opinions - some of which are not supported by the facts - and see who could agree with you the hardest? That doesn't sound like much of a conversation to me but whatever. My bad.
Jim,
i apologize if you are offended by my retreat from the discussion, but i thought it would be better than letting my anger get the best of me.
&
I do not believe i ever attacked you personally so there is no reason not to be civil here.
if you feel the need for me to explain my actions further feel free to message me via PM.
i just realized that participating in the Politiwook forum was not something i wanted to do anymore and therefore it was best if i did not speak more on the topic.
thank you for your participation in the discussion.
please feel free to start your own topic on the subject and link to this thread for the beginning of the discussion.
:-)