Democracy Being Auctioned to the Highest Bidder

Citizens United - worst SCOTUS decision in history?
Politics • Views: 42,246

If you read only one article today, it should be this disturbing look at the tiny group of ultra-rich elitists who are buying America’s democracy right out from under our noses: Charts: Just How Small Is the Super-PAC Gazillionaire Club?

The 2012 elections are on track to be the nastiest in recent memory. By the tail end of primary season, in May, 70 percent of all presidential campaign ads were negative, up from a mere 9 percent at the same point in 2008. The culprits for this spike in attack ads were super-PACs and shadowy nonprofits, which together dominate the growing universe of outside political groups poised to spend billions of dollars this election season.

Now a new report�from the liberal think tank Demos and the nonpartisan US Public Interest Research Group has revealed how what has been called a “tsunami of slime” is funded by a tiny cadre of wealthy donors.

Just 1,082 donors—a group small enough to fit inside a single high school gymnasium—accounted for 94 percent of all individual donations to super-PACs from January 1, 2011 to June 30, 2012. Those 1,082 donors amount to just 0.00035 percent of the US population.

Jump to bottom

166 comments
1 Dark_Falcon  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 11:25:14am

As long as it is known who the donors are, I don't have a problem with this.

2 jamesfirecat  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 11:26:25am

re: #1 Dark_Falcon

As long as it is known who the donors are, I don't have a problem with this.

Say dark, does your company plan on rebranding itself as Ares Macrotechnology any time soon?

3 Four More Tears  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 11:26:47am

re: #1 Dark_Falcon

As long as it is known who the donors are, I don't have a problem with this.

Of course you don't.

4 Dark_Falcon  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 11:27:11am

re: #2 jamesfirecat

Say dark, does your company plan on rebranding itself Ares Macrotechnology any time soon?

No, and I do not understand why you asked.

6 Charles Johnson  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 11:28:58am

More:

Super-PACs at least disclose their donors and their spending. On the other hand, dark-money nonprofits like Karl Rove's Crossroads GPS, the Koch-funded Americans for Prosperity, and the pro-Obama Priorities USA don't disclose any of their donors. Worse yet, as Mother Jones has reported, these nonprofits reveal very little about how much they spend.

Image: ZZ481CFD07.jpg

7 CuriousLurker  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 11:29:54am
8 jamesfirecat  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 11:30:03am

re: #4 Dark_Falcon

No, and I do not understand why you asked.

In Shadowrun Ares Macrotechnology is the corporation that basically took over most of the USA and it most famous products are various firearms/weapons.

I was just trying to sarcastically express my distaste for the idea of letting corporations and the people at the very top of them flood elections with money.

9 Dark_Falcon  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 11:35:51am

re: #6 Charles Johnson

More:

Image: ZZ481CFD07.jpg

That I have a problem with. Attack ads and their funding are protected speech, but I do think think disclosure a necessity in such matters. And I think disclosure rules could be written in such a way as they would not run afoul of the Citizens United decision.

10 jhrhv  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 11:39:38am

Modern democracy is becoming something most royals would be jealous of.

It truly does appear to be becoming a government of the rich for the rich by the rich.

11 Renaissance_Man  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 11:42:36am

re: #10 jhrhv

Modern democracy is becoming something most royals would be jealous of.

It truly does appear to be becoming a government of the rich for the rich by the rich.

Money has always bought access to power. We can argue about how wrong that is, but to do so would be a clearly theoretical exercise.

That said, I don't think there's a system on earth as nakedly plutocratic as the US one.

12 William Barnett-Lewis  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 11:44:22am

re: #10 jhrhv

Modern democracy is becoming something most royals would be jealous of.

It truly does appear to be becoming a government of the rich for the rich by the rich.

And the serfs better not complain of their jobs will be outsourced first.

They will be anyway, but if you complain or, GASP!, try to form a union, your jobs will be disappeared first.

13 William Barnett-Lewis  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 11:46:15am

I don't much like Frank Zappa & find the "Frank says:" bits usually to be dull at best, but I note this currently showing for me one fits rather perfectly with this thread:

Frank says:
The last election just laid the foundation for the next 500 years of Dark Ages. -- From 1981

14 wrenchwench  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 11:49:19am

re: #13 William Barnett-Lewis

I don't much like Frank Zappa & find the "Frank says:" bits usually to be dull at best, but I note this currently showing for me one fits rather perfectly with this thread:

Frank says:
The last election just laid the foundation for the next 500 years of Dark Ages. -- From 1981

Here's mine:

Frank says:

Seriousity is something to be laughed at. -- FZ responding to Dutch television after being told that Europeans take Frank's music very seriously.

15 Charles Johnson  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 11:51:17am

re: #14 wrenchwench

Frank's on a roll today:

When we talk about artistic freedom in this country we sometimes lose sight of the fact that freedom is dependent on adequate financing.

16 dragonath  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 11:51:32am

Pricacy for the ultra rich is a feature, not a bug.

Also, the Supreme Court has set the precedent for the destruction of state level campaign finance laws, which were enacted to keep specific interest groups in control.

The Supreme Court’s Cowardice

Kennedy, writing for the court’s 5-4 majority, said corporate independent campaign expenditures “do not give rise to corruption or the appearance of corruption.”
Montana begged to differ. Based on its history, which included the wholesale purchase of the state’s Legislature and political class by mine owners more than a century ago, Montana restricted corporate spending in elections. It did so not because the state abhors free speech, but because it required a bulwark against corporate corruption that had subverted the state’s laws and threatened the well-being of its citizens.

17 sattv4u2  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 11:52:42am

re: #1 Dark_Falcon

As long as it is known who the donors are, I don't have a problem with this.


Super-PACs at least disclose their donors and their spending. On the other hand, dark-money nonprofits like Karl Rove's Crossroads GPS, the Koch-funded Americans for Prosperity, and the pro-Obama Priorities USA don't disclose any of their donors.

18 wrenchwench  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 11:52:53am

re: #15 Charles Johnson

Frank's on a roll today:

That's my favorite one.

19 Dark_Falcon  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 11:54:33am

re: #15 Charles Johnson

Frank's on a roll today:

Then said artists need to do like George Clooney and Steven Sonderberg do: Make 1-2 'big' movies designed to make money and then use some of the proceeds to finance the 'art' movie you really want to make. Although with Contagion Sonderberg was able to bring some elements of both types of movie into the film.

20 CuriousLurker  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 11:57:31am

re: #14 wrenchwench

Frank says:

It's not pretty, also you can't dance to it.

21 researchok  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 11:57:55am

I saw this earlier. Two things stand out.

Firstly, opting out of federal funds didn't start with this cycle.

President Obama did that in 2008. For the Democrats to complain now because they are lagging in game they started is disingenuous at best. That said, it is good politics.

Secondly, in the money sweepstakes, the President is well ahead, $300 Million to about $153 million for Romney (See this FEC summary).

Citizens United was a bad idea. However, discussing the law in partisan political terms will go nowhere.

22 dragonath  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 12:02:34pm

McCain using public funding was the only thing I liked about his campaign. That said, Obama opting out of federal funds in 2008 is worlds away from the environment that exists now.

23 Ojoe  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 12:05:58pm

There is no proof against this type of spending on political speech except to educate people to be perceptive and think for themselves, once it is legislated that you must disclose who is paying for what ad.

But the efforts to repeal "Citizens United" are misplaced, I think, because hidden in that effort is the assumption that people are stupid and must be protected from hearing things, and behind that is the even worse item of an elite who wants to control what you hear.

Let them spend their money.

It is ultimately up to us to keep our eyes and ears open, and our minds active, and we will get what we deserve as a return on how well we do on that.

24 Varek Raith  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 12:07:31pm

re: #23 Ojoe

There is no proof against this type of spending on political speech except to educate people to be perceptive and think for themselves, once it is legislated that you must disclose who is paying for what ad.

But the efforts to repeal "Citizens United" are misplaced, I think, because hidden in that effort is the assumption that people are stupid and must be protected from hearing things, and behind that is the even worse item of an elite who wants to control what you hear.

Let them spend their money.

It is ultimately up to us to keep our eyes and ears open, and our minds active, and we will get what we deserve as a return on how well we do on that.

Because they are.
Look at all the people in this country who think AGW is a hoax.
Or that evolution is false.

25 sattv4u2  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 12:08:08pm

re: #24 Varek Raith

Because they are.
Look at all the people in this country who thing AGW is a hoax.
Or that evolution is false.

Or that we really landed on the moon!

26 Killgore Trout  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 12:08:29pm

re: #17 sattv4u2


Super-PACs at least disclose their donors and their spending. On the other hand, dark-money nonprofits like Karl Rove's Crossroads GPS, the Koch-funded Americans for Prosperity, and the pro-Obama Priorities USA don't disclose any of their donors.

Shhh!

27 Ojoe  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 12:08:33pm

re: #24 Varek Raith

Maybe so, but the cure here is worse than the disease.

28 sattv4u2  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 12:08:48pm

re: #26 Killgore Trout

Shhh!

oh ,, damn ,,,, shit

29 Varek Raith  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 12:09:03pm

re: #27 Ojoe

Maybe so, but the cure here is worse than the disease.

Nope.
Allowing unlimited, undisclosed money is far worse.

30 sattv4u2  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 12:09:27pm

re: #26 Killgore Trout

Shhh!

as he says from his pedestal!

31 Varek Raith  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 12:10:10pm

re: #26 Killgore Trout

Shhh!

Citizens United changed everything.

32 Ojoe  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 12:10:43pm

re: #29 Varek Raith

I agree, if it is undisclosed. It has to be disclosed. I think the best thing is to disclose, and very strictly, with teeth in the law, and then to stop there.

33 engineer cat  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 12:10:48pm

Democracy Being Auctioned

they should put it on ebay so us non-gazillionaires could watch the bidding

34 Varek Raith  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 12:11:21pm

re: #32 Ojoe

I agree, if it is undisclosed. It has to be disclosed. I think the best thing is to disclose, and very strictly, with teeth in the law, and then to stop there.

That's good and all, but tell the GOP to stop blocking such efforts.
PS, they won't.

35 Ojoe  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 12:12:20pm

re: #34 Varek Raith

That's good and all, but tell the GOP to stop blocking such efforts.
PS, they won't.

Well I could go on about the Modern Whig Party if you would like.

LOL

36 engineer cat  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 12:14:20pm

re: #1 Dark_Falcon

As long as it is known who the donors are, I don't have a problem with this.

it's always good to know who owns your state

37 dragonath  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 12:17:12pm

What's being lost in this discussion is the inevitable inflation in ad spending.

I mean, Joe Schmo for Congress can't afford to run a $20,000 ad on the network, and his message won't get out to a broad market. Free speech?

Smart people will believe dumb things when an alternative doesn't exist.

38 Romantic Heretic  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 12:20:20pm

Shrugs. If you do not wish people to buy America, do not sell it. - Akio Morita

America has been for sale at remainder prices for decades now. It's just a lot more blatant now.

39 sattv4u2  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 12:23:24pm

re: #38 Romantic Heretic

If you do not wish people to buy America, do not sell it. - Akio Morita

Wax on, wax off - Mister Miyagi

40 engineer cat  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 12:23:53pm

re: #38 Romantic Heretic

Shrugs. If you do not wish people to buy America, do not sell it. - Akio Morita

America has been for sale at remainder prices for decades now. It's just a lot more blatant now.

the richest people in a nation exerting undue influence is unavoidable, almost like a law of physics. democracy only mitigates it. if laws with teeth are passed, the rich hire oral surgeons to subtly defang them

it ends up being a game very much like hackers vs cybersecurity experts

41 William Barnett-Lewis  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 12:24:40pm

re: #32 Ojoe

I agree, if it is undisclosed. It has to be disclosed. I think the best thing is to disclose, and very strictly, with teeth in the law, and then to stop there.

Won't happen. SCOTUS has decreed that there is nothing wrong with Citizens United despite what history has shown.

42 Charles Johnson  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 12:26:43pm

Meanwhile there are pissy slap fights breaking out everywhere in right wing blog world. There's hamburger all over the Wingnut Highway.

And they're all still whining about nonexistent plots to silence them on Twitter. The never-ending pity party.

43 researchok  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 12:36:25pm

re: #42 Charles Johnson

Misery loves company.

There isn't anything substantive they can add (they've pretty much painted themselves into the stupid corner) so this is all they can talk about to distract everyone from their failures to be relevant and to be taken seriously.

They cannot admit to being occasionally wrong because if they do they have to concede they are like everyone else- less than perfect, less than pious.

And make no mistake- the piety thing is for them a big deal.

44 sattv4u2  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 12:37:08pm

re: #42 Charles Johnson

There's hamburger all over the Wingnut Highway.

Not zaccly sure what that means, but i wouldn't mind having one medium rare with sauteed mushrooms and Swiss cheese and a side of onion rings

45 Amory Blaine  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 12:46:19pm

re: #23 Ojoe

There is no proof against this type of spending on political speech except to educate people to be perceptive and think for themselves, once it is legislated that you must disclose who is paying for what ad.

But the efforts to repeal "Citizens United" are misplaced, I think, because hidden in that effort is the assumption that people are stupid and must be protected from hearing things, and behind that is the even worse item of an elite who wants to control what you hear.

Let them spend their money.

It is ultimately up to us to keep our eyes and ears open, and our minds active, and we will get what we deserve as a return on how well we do on that.

So we really are doomed. ;)

46 Ojoe  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 12:46:49pm

re: #44 sattv4u2

That's a Firesign Theater reference, I'm not sure what album.

47 Stormageddon, Dark Lord of All  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 12:46:57pm

First, what we want is probably pie in the sky right now, particularly with how obstructionist the Republicans have become. But what I would love to see is at least a partial removal of the concept of 'corporation as a person'. I'm all ok with people speaking out, even anonymously. But the instant you begin creating a shell game of corporations and hiding the money trail, then you run into all sorts of problems.

Individuals speaking out, anonymously is a cornerstone of free speech. The Citizens United decision wasn't wrongly decided, based on the current concept of corporations as people. remove that concept, and that aspect of the problem goes away.

Do people with money have more opportunity to have their voice heard? yes. and that's something that will never change. But what needs to change is the ability to lie and obfuscate. Certain speech is not protected. Yelling fire in a crowded theater, *when there is not a fire* is not protected. Speech that leads directly to injury or death is not protected. (I promise, I'm getting to a point here LOL) even corporations as people should be held to that standard. And I think that the instant a corporation crosses the line into behavior like that, the corporate veil should be pierced and the individuals behind the activities should be held responsible.

At what point do mouth pieces like the Heartland institute cross from being a honest dissenting scientific opinion (if they ever were, which I doubt), into actively causing harm, injury, and death to people because of their speech? It may be a stretch, but it's a thought.

Can the same concept be applied to political speech? I don't know, after all America has a history of some spectacularly appalling and nasty campaigns. It doesn't mean it's right. But I'm torn, because what I personally don't approve of doesn't mean it should be illegal. But what has to change is the idea of corporations giving a shield to lie.

To give a further analogy, you have the right to travel in the US, but you don't have a constitutional right to use a car to do your traveling, or fly, those are all privileges that are granted. I think that similar thread of logic can be applied to speech and individuals/corporations.

Sorry about the meandering nature of the post. I hope there's a point somewhere in here.

48 Amory Blaine  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 12:47:36pm

re: #42 Charles Johnson

Meanwhile there are pissy slap fights breaking out everywhere in right wing blog world. There's hamburger all over the Wingnut Highway.

And they're all still whining about nonexistent plots to silence them on Twitter. The never-ending pity party.

I thought the wingnut highway was covered with chicken filets this week.

49 Charles Johnson  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 12:49:12pm
50 Ojoe  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 12:50:48pm

re: #45 Amory Blaine

So we really are doomed. ;)

Democracy is sort of disfunctional but all other forms of government are worse...

51 Charles Johnson  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 12:54:17pm

Robert Spencer gets into it, explaining that the problems with "Weasel Zippers" started when he didn't understand that Rick Perry was a stealth Shariah agent and decided to shun Ms Geller:

...the blogger being discussed below is Weasel Zippers. Zip and I had once been friendly and actually had been planning to meet again for lunch when he wrote me and asked me to stop linking his posts at Jihad Watch, because then when Pamela Geller would link my posts, a link to his site would show up at Atlas Shrugs, and he didn’t want to have anything to do with her because of her exposure of Rick Perry’s Islam curriculum. When I responded incredulously, he grew progressively more abusive, finally ending up by repeating the Leftist/Islamic supremacist smear that I was responsible for the Norway murders. He still does cover jihad issues at Weasel Zippers, but not in a way that would trouble anyone who buys the propaganda line, purveyed by both Leftists and Fox, that Islam is a Religion of Peace that has been Hijacked by a Tiny Minority of Extremists.

52 Ojoe  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 12:56:53pm

re: #47 Stormageddon, Dark Lord of All

We will just have to live with the imperfections.

Now for instance, a Corporation certainly is a peaceful assembly of persons, and has a right to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

I say let a corporation be a legal person; just review corporate charters periodically & disband the corporations found not to be operating in the public interest.

A corporation is a creature of the state after all, and the government here is you and me.

53 engineer cat  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 1:02:01pm

re: #50 Ojoe

Democracy is sort of disfunctional but all other forms of government are worse...

i've been trying to promote the Hunting and Gathering Subsistence Economy Roving Tribal Bands of Starving Nomads Revolutionary Party, but so far the only people who are interested can't read

on the other hand, it might be an improvement since in order to influence the government under this system you have to kill more than one wooly mammoth armed only with a sharpened stick

54 Lidane  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 1:05:48pm

re: #1 Dark_Falcon

As long as it is known who the donors are, I don't have a problem with this.

Of course not. As long as Republicans win, who cares that they're also perverting the whole concept of democracy?

55 Decatur Deb  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 1:06:18pm

re: #35 Ojoe

Well I could go on about the Modern Whig Party if you would like.

LOL

We could use a Whig-inspired fix. "All political communications must be hand-rendered with quill pens, and delivered on horseback."

56 abolitionist  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 1:07:36pm

re: #55 Decatur Deb

No goose would be safe.

57 SanFranciscoZionist  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 1:08:24pm

re: #51 Charles Johnson

Robert Spencer gets into it, explaining that the problems with "Weasel Zippers" started when he didn't understand that Rick Perry was a stealth Shariah agent and decided to shun Ms Geller:

I had forgotten that Rick Perry was a stealth Sharia agent. I still can't remember what he did to earn the title.

58 Decatur Deb  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 1:08:45pm

re: #56 abolitionist

No goose would be safe.

!!JOBS!!!1

59 SanFranciscoZionist  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 1:09:21pm

re: #57 SanFranciscoZionist

I had forgotten that Rick Perry was a stealth Sharia agent. I still can't remember what he did to earn the title.

How sure are we that Romney's not a stealth Sharia agent? I mean, do these people really imagine that with the Muslim Brotherhood controlling the country like they do that someone who hasn't signed on the dotted line in green ink would be allowed to get this far?

60 Ojoe  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 1:09:38pm

re: #55 Decatur Deb

Yes, that would slow things down.

Jefferson thought that American health was worse because too many people had taken to riding horses where formerly they had walked, by the way.

Ah, I have to get some work done!

BBL

61 Decatur Deb  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 1:10:31pm

re: #58 Decatur Deb

!!JOBS!!!1

Nothing--the rwnjs mistook his favorite 'tacqueria' for 'taquiyah'.

62 sattv4u2  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 1:10:46pm

re: #47 Stormageddon, Dark Lord of All

(I promise, I'm getting to a point here LOL)

You could have sold snacks here as an intermission break!

63 Charles Johnson  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 1:12:08pm

re: #57 SanFranciscoZionist

I had forgotten that Rick Perry was a stealth Sharia agent. I still can't remember what he did to earn the title.

There was some stealth shariah in the Texas school curriculum - don't remember the details. There's so much stealth shariah everywhere that I can't keep track of it all.

64 goddamnedfrank  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 1:13:48pm

Best quote from this article, "When Harry Reid doesn't like somebody, he goes for the jugular."

A second source, said to be "close to Senator [Harry] Reid," has told CNN's Dana Bash that Reid's original source for the claim that Mitt Romney "didn't
pay any taxes for 10 years" exists, is a "Bain investor" and a "credible person."

Dana Bash reported on this source, and the person's willingness to corroborate the allegation to which the Senate majority leader repeated on Thursday's airing of CNN's AC360.

As Bash told the show's host, Anderson Cooper:

I did speak to one source who is very close to Senator Reid who claims to also know who the Bain investor is that Reid spoke with, and insists that it is a credible person and this person if we knew the name we would understand they would have the authority and the ability to know about Romney's tax returns.
"Whether we'll find it out ever," Bash added, "who knows? They're doing it on purpose, so this is the discussion."

Indeed, in the days since the Huffington Post first reported on Reid's claim, Reid has done nothing to back down. The Romney camp on Thursday responded by insisting that Reid "put up or shut up." Reid, on the other hand, has made it clear that the burden of disproving his claim lies with Romney.

65 SanFranciscoZionist  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 1:15:04pm

re: #64 goddamnedfrank

Best quote from this article, "When Harry Reid doesn't like somebody, he goes for the jugular."

Indeed, in the days since the Huffington Post first reported on Reid's claim, Reid has done nothing to back down. The Romney camp on Thursday responded by insisting that Reid "put up or shut up." Reid, on the other hand, has made it clear that the burden of disproving his claim lies with Romney.

Harry Reid: doing his best impersonation of one of those small terriers when they just lose it and savage the UPS guy.

66 Amory Blaine  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 1:15:26pm

Small loss for tea party fascists.

Supreme Court: Emergency manager repeal must go on November ballot

A 4-3 decision Friday by the Michigan Supreme ended a lengthy dispute over the font size used on a ballot initiative petition but set off a bigger fight over the status of emergency managers and consent agreements in a handful of Michigan cities and school districts.

A divided court ruled that Stand up for Democracy’s petition to repeal the toughened emergency manager law, Public Act 4, must go on the Nov. 6 ballot. In a development reminiscent of the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent ruling on President Obama’s Affordable Care Act, Republican nominee Mary Beth Kelly broke with the GOP majority and wrote the majority opinion with the partial support of three Democratic nominees.

67 Targetpractice  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 1:17:10pm

re: #1 Dark_Falcon

As long as it is known who the donors are, I don't have a problem with this.

Justice Kennedy, is that you?

/

68 Charles Johnson  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 1:17:38pm

You know, if you think about it, it's pretty amazing that Pamela Geller manages to keep all the details of all her ridiculous stealth shariah claims straight. Somebody should make a list of all the stealth shariah accusations she and Spencer have made -- it would be a really long list.

69 Charles Johnson  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 1:18:44pm

There's an idea for a Page, if anyone feels motivated. Guaranteed front page promotion.

70 researchok  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 1:19:45pm

re: #68 Charles Johnson

Spreadsheets.

71 SanFranciscoZionist  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 1:20:34pm

re: #68 Charles Johnson

You know, if you think about it, it's pretty amazing that Pamela Geller manages to keep all the details of all her ridiculous stealth shariah claims straight. Somebody should make a list of all the stealth shariah accusations she and Spencer have made -- it would be a really long list.

I envision her surrounded by...you know the scene in "A Beautiful Mind" where they get inside his office, and there's this giant, cross-referenced mess of Life Magazine clippings that he's been accumulating as he tries to figure out what the Soviets are up to?

(Disclaimer: John Nash was legitimately schizophrenic. Pam is doing this to herself.)

72 wrenchwench  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 1:21:39pm

re: #68 Charles Johnson

You know, if you think about it, it's pretty amazing that Pamela Geller manages to keep all the details of all her ridiculous stealth shariah claims straight. Somebody should make a list of all the stealth shariah accusations she and Spencer have made -- it would be a really long list.

I wonder what it would take to get Geller and Spencer fighting each other.

73 goddamnedfrank  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 1:22:13pm

re: #70 researchok

Spreadsheets.

#DIV/0!

74 Kragar  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 1:22:15pm

Well, back from the swap meet. Walked in with 3 boxes and no money. Walked out with 1 box and $150.

75 SanFranciscoZionist  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 1:23:42pm

re: #71 SanFranciscoZionist

(Disclaimer: John Nash was legitimately schizophrenic. Pam is doing this to herself.)

Further Disclaimer: I think. I'm reluctant to do the 'having different views from me is a mental illness' crap schtick, but I'm starting to think there's some form of group hypnosis or something happening with some of these people.

76 researchok  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 1:23:53pm

re: #74 Kragar

Sam Adams for me.

77 Amory Blaine  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 1:24:32pm

Around here, going to a garage sale means perusing items that were on the shelf at WalMart 3 years ago.

78 researchok  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 1:25:24pm

re: #72 wrenchwench

One big check, no sharing

79 Our Precious Bodily Fluids  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 1:25:57pm

re: #73 goddamnedfrank

#DIV/0!

~divide by potato~

80 Targetpractice  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 1:29:02pm

re: #74 Kragar

Well, back from the swap meet. Walked in with 3 boxes and no money. Walked out with 1 box and $150.

What's in the box? The hearts of your fallen enemies?

//

81 Killgore Trout  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 1:29:58pm

re: #75 SanFranciscoZionist

Further Disclaimer: I think. I'm reluctant to do the 'having different views from me is a mental illness' crap schtick, but I'm starting to think there's some form of group hypnosis or something happening with some of these people.

I'm increasingly wary of that schtick as well these days. It's important to remember that it is warranted in certain extreme examples. Pam is one of them.

82 Kragar  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 1:30:41pm

re: #80 Targetpractice

What's in the box? The hearts of your fallen enemies?

//

Mostly my assorted junk bits.

83 TedStriker  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 1:31:30pm

re: #78 researchok

One big check, no sharing

And make it physically huge, like the ones people get in lottery/Publisher's Clearing House photo ops.

Make them get into a real scrap over that...

84 Lidane  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 1:32:13pm

re: #55 Decatur Deb

We could use a Whig-inspired fix. "All political communications must be hand-rendered with quill pens, and delivered on horseback."

I'm surprised Crazy Uncle Luap Nor hasn't suggested that yet. After all, it's how the Founders did it. =P

85 funky chicken  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 1:32:33pm

re: #11 Renaissance_Man

Money has always bought access to power. We can argue about how wrong that is, but to do so would be a clearly theoretical exercise.

That said, I don't think there's a system on earth as nakedly plutocratic as the US one.

Um, off the top of my head, Saudi Arabia?

86 researchok  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 1:32:35pm

re: #75 SanFranciscoZionist

Further Disclaimer: I think. I'm reluctant to do the 'having different views from me is a mental illness' crap schtick, but I'm starting to think there's some form of group hypnosis or something happening with some of these people.

What you are referring to (at least in the political arena) is identity politics.

A huge problem today.

87 dragonfire1981  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 1:34:13pm

re: #80 Targetpractice

What's in the box? The hearts of your fallen enemies?

//

"It's the beating of that hideous heart!"

88 sattv4u2  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 1:34:17pm

re: #75 SanFranciscoZionist

re: #86 researchok

The only time I invoke the 'having different views from me is a mental illness' is when people start talking pineapple on pizza!!

89 Targetpractice  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 1:34:39pm

re: #85 funky chicken

Um, off the top of my head, Saudi Arabia?

The Saudis generally cut a little lower than the top of your head. Think more towards the neck region.

//

90 Lidane  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 1:34:40pm

re: #51 Charles Johnson

Rick Perry as a stealth Sharia agent? ROFL. That's hilarious.

I'm still wondering what the breaking point would be between Geller and Spencer. I'd imagine it would involve her being caught dating a Muslim man or complimenting a Muslim woman on her clothes or something.

91 researchok  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 1:34:57pm

re: #88 sattv4u2

Cause for involuntary commitment.
//

92 Lidane  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 1:37:01pm

re: #85 funky chicken

Um, off the top of my head, Saudi Arabia?

Saudi Arabia is the system that the uber-wealthy like Romney would love to have here, only with individual fiefdoms rather than a single royal family in charge.

93 sattv4u2  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 1:39:21pm

re: #88 sattv4u2

re: #86 researchok

The only time I invoke the 'having different views from me is a mental illness' is when people start talking pineapple on pizza!!

Oh ,, and anything that Kilgore says from his pedestal!

94 Killgore Trout  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 1:41:42pm

re: #93 sattv4u2

Oh ,, and anything that Kilgore says from his pedestal!

These pantaloons make me talk crazy.

95 Amory Blaine  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 1:46:19pm

Does anyone know what happened to oh crap?

96 sattv4u2  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 1:46:38pm

re: #95 Amory Blaine

Does anyone know what happened to oh crap?

flushed!
/

97 Amory Blaine  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 1:47:53pm

flushed means banned I suppose?

98 wrenchwench  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 1:49:29pm

re: #86 researchok

What you are referring to (at least in the political arena) is identity politics.

A huge problem today.

I don't think all "identity politics" are bad. In this case, it is. Wikipedia has an apt sentence for it:

The rise of the right-wing in Europe, particularly following the European Parliament election, 2009, was seen as an establishment of identity as reflected against the "other" minorities.

But when right wingers use the term, they're usually saying that one can't determine one's self interest merely by what group they identify with, even though the same wingers will deny people their rights based on being a member of that group.

99 sattv4u2  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 1:49:43pm

re: #97 Amory Blaine

flushed means banned I suppose?

no

just a play on words

i have no idea what/where/when or even if

100 TedStriker  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 1:52:29pm

re: #95 Amory Blaine

Does anyone know what happened to oh crap?

re: #97 Amory Blaine

flushed means banned I suppose?

AFAIK, she just stopped coming, for whatever reason.

101 CuriousLurker  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 1:53:34pm

re: #95 Amory Blaine

Does anyone know what happened to oh crap?

She hasn't tweeted since December, and her last blog post, in which she said she was taking a break, was in in October, so I don't think she was "flushed" or banned. Hopefully, she's alive & well somewhere.

102 sattv4u2  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 1:53:39pm

re: #100 TedStriker

re: #97 Amory Blaine

AFAIK, she just stopped coming, for whatever reason.

not enough "confederates" around here for her to rail against!!

//(somewhat)

103 wrenchwench  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 1:54:28pm

re: #102 sattv4u2

not enough "confederates" around here for her to rail against!!

//(somewhat)

You just made me miss her more.

104 CuriousLurker  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 1:55:52pm

re: #103 wrenchwench

You just made me miss her more.

Heh, yeah, she was kinda over the top sometimes, but she knew her stuff WRT religious groups & black history. I miss her knowledge.

105 TedStriker  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 1:56:50pm

re: #102 sattv4u2

not enough "confederates" around here for her to rail against!!

//(somewhat)

Seriously? Bagging on someone who's not here (and, most likely, won't be here any time soon) to defend themselves?

Could you look like more of an ass?

106 Obdicut  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 1:57:26pm

Muscular hipsters just look like Norwegians.

107 sattv4u2  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 1:58:01pm

re: #105 TedStriker

Seriously? Bagging on someone who's not here (and, most likely, won't be here any time soon) to defend themselves?

Could you look like more of an ass?

"bagging"!?!?!

{sigh}

And yes, I could be more of an ass, but unlike you I don't name call!

108 TedStriker  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 2:01:02pm

re: #107 sattv4u2

"bagging"!?!?!

{sigh}

And yes, I could be more of an ass, but unlike you I don't name call!

Hey, if you want to call yourself an ass, that's all on you; I just said you were acting like one.

109 TedStriker  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 2:02:30pm

re: #107 sattv4u2

BTW, let me translate for you: bagging (or ragging) on someone -> talking smack -> disrespecting. Follow me now?

110 wrenchwench  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 2:03:13pm

re: #106 Obdicut

Muscular hipsters just look like Norwegians.

Intentional rotating aphorism composition?

111 sattv4u2  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 2:04:58pm

re: #109 TedStriker

BTW, let me translate for you: bagging on someone -> dissing -> disrespecting. Follow me now?

How is me stating the fact that many of her posts had "confederates" as her main protagonists in them "dissing" or "disrespecting" her?

{sigh}

112 sattv4u2  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 2:06:30pm

Oh ,, wait

"IT'S SATT ,,, MUST DISAGREE"

Silly me. I'm a tad tired and I forgot!

113 TedStriker  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 2:07:21pm

re: #111 sattv4u2

Don't get me wrong; I certainly didn't approve of everything she posted or how she did it. However, AFAIK, she's still a Lizard in good standing; to me, it's uncouth to talk shit about someone who won't likely be here to defend themselves.

114 sattv4u2  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 2:08:17pm

re: #113 TedStriker

re: #107 sattv4u2

Don't get me wrong; I certainly didn't approve of everything she posted or how she did it. However, AFAIK, she's still a Lizard in good standing; to me, it's uncouth to talk shit about someone who can't defend themselves.

And again, how is what I said "talk"ing "shit"?

115 sattv4u2  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 2:08:29pm

{sigh}

116 wrenchwench  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 2:10:17pm

Sure is windy in here.

118 Targetpractice  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 2:14:00pm

re: #117 Varek Raith

Romney Smears Obama, Falsely Claims He Filed Lawsuit To Restrict Military Voting In Ohio

Give me a second to put on my surprised face.

//

119 Lidane  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 2:15:24pm

re: #117 Varek Raith

Romney Smears Obama, Falsely Claims He Filed Lawsuit To Restrict Military Voting In Ohio

But remember -- as long as we know who Romney's donors are and as long as the Republicans win, it's all okay.

120 dragonath  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 2:17:01pm

Las Vegas Sands target of U.S. money-laundering probe, WSJ says

The Los Angeles U.S. attorney's office is looking into the casino company's handling of the receipt of millions of dollars from a Mexican businessman, later indicted in the United States for drug trafficking, and a former California businessman, later convicted of taking illegal kickbacks, the Journal said, citing lawyers and others involved in the matter.

Sands is owned by Sheldon Adelson, Romney fundraiser.

121 TedStriker  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 2:18:05pm

re: #120 Fred Galt

Las Vegas Sands target of U.S. money-laundering probe, WSJ says

Sands is owned by Sheldon Adelson, Romney fundraiser.

Ruh roh!

122 Targetpractice  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 2:18:11pm

re: #120 Fred Galt

Las Vegas Sands target of U.S. money-laundering probe, WSJ says

Sands is owned by Sheldon Adelson, Romney fundraiser.

Money-laundering? In Vegas?! Surely you jest!!

123 Dark_Falcon  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 2:18:19pm

re: #51 Charles Johnson

Robert Spencer gets into it, explaining that the problems with "Weasel Zippers" started when he didn't understand that Rick Perry was a stealth Shariah agent and decided to shun Ms Geller:

I know Rick Perry is an ass, but sometimes I find myself pulling for him. I still don't like him, but I try to wish even someone like him well in efforts that leave the people who go "Oh No, Mexicans/Muslims!!1" screaming in the street.

124 Dark_Falcon  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 2:19:32pm

re: #104 CuriousLurker

Heh, yeah, she was kinda over the top sometimes, but she knew her stuff WRT religious groups & black history. I miss her knowledge.

She missed no opportunity to attack me and called my a "Neo-Confederate" repeatedly, so I miss her not at all.

125 Obdicut  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 2:21:33pm

re: #110 wrenchwench

Intentional rotating aphorism composition?

Nah, just a conversation my wife and I were having. I've been going to the 92nd Y a lot, so I was talking about how funny it'd be to be muscular and then dress like a hipster and then I looked at the mental image I'd created and realized it was just a Norwegian

126 Obdicut  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 2:22:01pm

re: #124 Dark_Falcon

She missed no opportunity to attack me and called my a "Neo-Confederate" repeatedly, so I miss her not at all.

You're not a neo-confederate, you're just perfectly comfortable supporting neo-confederates.

127 Varek Raith  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 2:22:44pm

re: #125 Obdicut

Nah, just a conversation my wife and I were having. I've been going to the 92nd Y a lot, so I was talking about how funny it'd be to be muscular and then dress like a hipster and then I looked at the mental image I'd created and realized it was just a Norwegian

I do not understand.
/

128 sattv4u2  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 2:23:26pm

re: #127 Varek Raith

I do not understand.
/

There's an app for that

129 Obdicut  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 2:23:55pm

From another forum:

I mean, and not to start on a tangent here, the fundamental thing about libertarianism as a political philosophy is that it is perfectly internally consistent, logically rigorous, easily applied, and completely wrong.

It's like a math or physics formula that is elegant and beautiful and conceptually complete but because of a failure of key premises does not describe the way the world actually works.

The thing is - when an astrophysicist builds a wonderfully lovely model explaining how the earth revolves around the moon, and then defends it to the death because of its simplicity and elegance, we don't call that astrophysicist credible, or creditable, or anything else.

What we call them is a "bad astrophysicist."

130 Dark_Falcon  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 2:29:26pm

re: #126 Obdicut

You're not a neo-confederate, you're just perfectly comfortable supporting neo-confederates.

Such as? Not Romney, surely, since he's not one, and not Bachmann, since I made clear I'd vote for Obama over her and Ron Paul.

131 William Barnett-Lewis  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 2:29:52pm

re: #129 Obdicut

Still gives the libertarians far too much credit for intellectual rigor, but it is a very good post.

132 Dark_Falcon  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 2:30:57pm

BBIAB

133 Lidane  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 2:33:50pm

re: #130 Dark_Falcon

Such as?

Ted Cruz. He supports nullification and all sorts of bad ideas that the neo-Confederates love to ramble on about.

134 Obdicut  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 2:38:58pm

re: #130 Dark_Falcon

Such as? Not Romney, surely, since he's not one, and not Bachmann, since I made clear I'd vote for Obama over her and Ron Paul.

Romney isn't anything much, but the majority of GOP state platforms these days are neo-Confederate, wailing about states rights, wanting to weaken the federal government's regulation of treatment of minorities, voting rights, etc.

Hell, just the voting purge attempts alone by the GOP are neo-Confederate. Or neo-neo-confederate, since the first assholes to pull that were post Civil War.

135 Obdicut  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 2:39:19pm

re: #133 Lidane

Ted Cruz. He supports nullification and all sorts of bad ideas that the neo-Confederates love to ramble on about.

Oh, right, Cruz. I forgot about that whacked out nutbar.

136 Obdicut  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 2:40:11pm

re: #131 William Barnett-Lewis

Still gives the libertarians far too much credit for intellectual rigor, but it is a very good post.

Some libertarians manage to have rigor. Most don't. But all of them just ignore the failure of their premises to hold, or hand-wave it aside in much the way Marxists do, because everything will be better after the revolution.

137 Lidane  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 2:46:59pm

re: #134 Obdicut

Romney isn't anything much, but the majority of GOP state platforms these days are neo-Confederate, wailing about states rights, wanting to weaken the federal government's regulation of treatment of minorities, voting rights, etc.

Hell, just the voting purge attempts alone by the GOP are neo-Confederate. Or neo-neo-confederate, since the first assholes to pull that were post Civil War.

Yeah, this. Voting for the GOP these days amounts to endorsing the neo-Confederate views of nutbars like Luap Nor and the racist wannabe Klan types like the CCC. Conspiracies about voter fraud that require purging the voter rolls are just the tip of the iceberg there.

138 TedStriker  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 2:55:09pm

re: #137 Lidane

Yeah, this. Voting for the GOP these days amounts to endorsing the neo-Confederate views of nutbars like Luap Nor and the racist wannabe Klan types like the CCC. Conspiracies about voter fraud that require purging the voter rolls are just the tip of the iceberg there.

Yeah, it's really, really hard to avoid throwing the baby out with the bathwater IRT the current incarnation of the GOP and lumping what sane Republicans are left along with the nuts, racists/bigots, and revanchists. I say this as a GOP refugee.

However, the choice is made easier by the fact that the RNC and state GOP committees are either standing idly by while the inmates overrun the asylum or they are actively courting what used to be the fringe.

As long as that is, I'll likely never vote GOP again, not even for dogcatcher, because every party victory strengthens and emboldens the crazies and those who just want to watch the world burn.

139 SanFranciscoZionist  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 4:12:04pm

re: #90 Lidane

Rick Perry as a stealth Sharia agent? ROFL. That's hilarious.

I'm still wondering what the breaking point would be between Geller and Spencer. I'd imagine it would involve her being caught dating a Muslim man or complimenting a Muslim woman on her clothes or something.

Well, Pam was actually very nice and supportive about Rima Fakih winning Miss U.S.A. Some other people, including, God help him, Daniel Pipes, were not.

140 Stephen T.  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 4:21:12pm

re: #23 Ojoe

There is no proof against this type of spending on political speech except to educate people to be perceptive and think for themselves, once it is legislated that you must disclose who is paying for what ad.

What of those PACs and SuperPACs that are buying time and ad space, not to run commercials, but to prevent their competitors from buying that time and ad space?

This is happening in my home state and no one is batting an eye.

141 sattv4u2  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 4:26:24pm

re: #140 Stephen T.

What of those PACs and SuperPACs that are buying time and ad space, not to run commercials, but to prevent their competitors from buying that time and ad space?

This is happening in my home state and no one is batting an eye.

wait ,,, they're just putting up dead air?

They must be broadcasting something in the airtime,, Old Road runner cartoons?

142 Stephen T.  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 4:45:54pm

re: #141 sattv4u2

They are buying ad space and air time, and not putting their own commercials up, but are instead reselling the ad space and air time to those companies and sponsors who donate to their campaign, and specifically preventing ad buys from their competitors.

143 sattv4u2  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 4:51:45pm

re: #142 Stephen T.

They are buying ad space and air time, and not putting their own commercials up, but are instead reselling the ad space and air time to those companies and sponsors who donate to their campaign, and specifically preventing ad buys from their competitors.

and??

(not condoning it, but it's a long time practice in both politics and the business sector)

((I have some insight into this, having been in the broadcast industry now for some 30 years)))

144 sattv4u2  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 4:52:56pm

re: #142 Stephen T.

re: #143 sattv4u2

and??

(not condoning it, but it's a long time practice in both politics and the business sector)

((I have some insight into this, having been in the broadcast industry now for some 30 years)))

And not limited to airtime btw

Billboards, newspaper ad space, radio spots, etc etc

145 Stephen T.  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 4:56:07pm
and??

(not condoning it, but it's a long time practice in both politics and the business sector)

((I have some insight into this, having been in the broadcast industry now for some 30 years)))

I thought ALL Americans had the right of free speech. Does my lack of money mean I have less free speech than the richer man?

146 sattv4u2  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 5:01:22pm

re: #145 Stephen T.

I thought ALL Americans had the right of free speech. Does my lack of money mean I have less free speech than the richer man?

Is this a new concept to you? "Rich man" has always had the more "say", more access than people with "lack of money". In politics, in business, in life

Now, before and later

That doesn't negate your "right of free speech". it's not a zero sum game

147 sattv4u2  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 5:06:52pm

re: #145 Stephen T.

re: #146 sattv4u2

How far would you care to go back? Do you think Joseph Kennedy Sr. let people with "lack of money" have the ear of his son, Jack?

148 kirkspencer  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 5:07:51pm

re: #23 Ojoe

There is no proof against this type of spending on political speech except to educate people to be perceptive and think for themselves, once it is legislated that you must disclose who is paying for what ad.

But the efforts to repeal "Citizens United" are misplaced, I think, because hidden in that effort is the assumption that people are stupid and must be protected from hearing things, and behind that is the even worse item of an elite who wants to control what you hear.

Let them spend their money.

It is ultimately up to us to keep our eyes and ears open, and our minds active, and we will get what we deserve as a return on how well we do on that.

Way late, sorry. I think it's a bit different.

See, all people have a voice, but those with a lot of money have a LOT bigger megaphone. Or to use a more classic phrase:

All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others.

149 sattv4u2  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 5:09:25pm

re: #148 kirkspencer

Way late, sorry. I think it's a bit different.

See, all people have a voice, but those with a lot of money have a LOT bigger megaphone. Or to use a more classic phrase:

All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others.

I agree, but again, this isn't something new (i.e. this years political tussle)

150 CuriousLurker  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 5:22:19pm

re: #57 SanFranciscoZionist

I had forgotten that Rick Perry was a stealth Sharia agent. I still can't remember what he did to earn the title.

IIRC, it had something to do with his friendship with the Aga Khan & school curriculum, but I can't recall the details.

151 Interesting Times  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 5:27:15pm

re: #149 sattv4u2

I agree, but again, this isn't something new (i.e. this years political tussle)

So? Just because something has always happened to some extent, we should have no problem with things that make it even worse?

152 sattv4u2  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 5:47:07pm

re: #151 Interesting Times

So? Just because something has always happened to some extent, we should have no problem with things that make it even worse?

But that's my point. It's no "worse" now than it was with (let's say) a Joseph Kennedy Sr, or a Tammany Hall. It's just that it's reported more now, noticed more now in this digital 24/7 age

The same people (read; RICH) had the same influence back then as the same people (read: RICH ) have now

Do you think the people that attended the soirees at the Newport Rhode Island mansions during the gilded ages only talked about their tennis games?

153 CuriousLurker  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 6:14:29pm

re: #152 sattv4u2

The politics might have been "no worse" during the Gilded Age, but living & working conditions for many Americans were.

There was no FDA to protect & regulate things like food safety, medicine, sanitation, etc. There were no child labor laws or really ANY kind of labor laws to protect workers from horrors like the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire. There was no EPA, no National Parks Service, and no Social Security or Medicare for the elderly. If you were poor or disabled you were pretty much dependent on the kindness & charity of strangers. Jim Crow laws were in effect and women didn't have the right to vote. The list goes on and on...

154 sattv4u2  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 6:16:17pm

re: #153 CuriousLurker

totally different topic than what we were discussing, so i'm not sure what point you're making, especially since I don't disagree with your " living & working conditions for many Americans were." worse /em>

155 CuriousLurker  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 6:19:53pm

re: #154 sattv4u2

My point is that politics directly affect our living & working conditions. Things changed for the better, they can change for the worse.

156 sattv4u2  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 6:23:02pm

re: #155 CuriousLurker

My point is that politics directly affect our living & working conditions. Things changed for the better, they can change for the worse.

They always have, they always will

The thing that doesn't (and hasn't) changed is that the "rich' have more of a say than us others

The original point was if we all have "free" speech. The answer is yes we do. it's just that some have always been able to afford more of it than others

157 CuriousLurker  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 6:41:25pm

re: #156 sattv4u2

Oh, well in that case I guess we just have to sit back and hope that we continue to have a better class of rich folks running things than we had back in the day, and not worry that they're getting even more power put in their hands.

158 sattv4u2  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 6:44:44pm

re: #157 CuriousLurker

Oh, well in that case I guess we just have to sit back and hope that we continue to have a better class of rich folks running things than we had back in the day, and not worry that they're getting even more power put in their hands.

Well, from your list of how things have gotten better since the old days, todays rich are either better or have LESS power!

159 Patricia Kayden  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 6:53:09pm

While I don't agree with the Citizens United decision at all, if Obama wins, it may not be as helpful to the Republicans as its supporters thought it would be. Not really seeing any evidence at this point that the Republican-leaning SuperPacs are having a positive impact on the elections for Romney. He may be too unlikable to benefit from their largesse.

Having grown up in Canada, I don't recall any political ads during Canada's short elections. But it could be because I'm going senile and have been in the US since 1995. Wonder if other democracies allow companies/wealthy individuals to spend unlimited funds to get their favored candidates elected.

160 sattv4u2  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 6:54:37pm

And on that note, the long quiet drive home beckons

161 CuriousLurker  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 6:54:57pm

re: #158 sattv4u2

Well, from your list of how things have gotten better since the old days, todays rich are either better or have LESS power!

Personally, I think things got better because some regulatory powers were placed in the hands of the federal government, so, yeah, I believe they have less power than they used to. I don't happen to think handing them more than they already have is a good idea.

162 CuriousLurker  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 6:55:19pm

re: #160 sattv4u2

And on that note, the long quiet drive home beckons

Later.

163 Romantic Heretic  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 8:12:56pm

re: #52 Ojoe

We will just have to live with the imperfections.

Now for instance, a Corporation certainly is a peaceful assembly of persons, and has a right to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

I say let a corporation be a legal person; just review corporate charters periodically & disband the corporations found not to be operating in the public interest.

A corporation is a creature of the state after all, and the government here is you and me.

I have no problem with corporations being people. Unfortunately they are currently only half people. They have all the rights and privileges of people but none of the duties. They have freedom of speech, freedom of assembly and thanks to their money the right to vote. None of them feel the slightest need to sign up for military duty and risk getting their balls blown off in some faraway land. No corporation is ever going to go to jail for breaking the law, and they don't have the duty to pay taxes.

Nice work if you can get it.

164 Romantic Heretic  Sat, Aug 4, 2012 8:32:15pm

re: #136 Obdicut

Some libertarians manage to have rigor. Most don't. But all of them just ignore the failure of their premises to hold, or hand-wave it aside in much the way Marxists do, because everything will be better after the revolution.

I still simply regard libertarianism as anarchy rebranded.

165 Destro  Sun, Aug 5, 2012 8:47:37am

re: #1 Dark_Falcon

re: #8 jamesfirecat

In Shadowrun Ares Macrotechnology is the corporation that basically took over most of the USA and it most famous products are various firearms/weapons.

I was just trying to sarcastically express my distaste for the idea of letting corporations and the people at the very top of them flood elections with money.

"corporations are people my friend"

Mitt Romney.

166 jytdog  Sun, Aug 5, 2012 5:43:07pm

Just saying... money in politics matters most when voters are ignorant. [Link: www.princeton.edu...]

Nobody can steal your vote -- but you can not bother to vote at all, as most Americans do, or you can just give your vote away to whoever panders to your hopes and fears. We have become a nation of whiners who fail to vote, fail to be informed when we do, and fail again to even admit that. Those failures are not SCOTUS' fault, nor the corporations' fault. They are our fault.

My wish is that people would talk about voter responsibility more than about Citizens United, or at least mention it every time they bring up Citizens United.


This article has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Create a PageThis is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2023-04-04 11:11 am PDT
LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds

Help support Little Green Footballs!

Subscribe now for ad-free access!Register and sign in to a free LGF account before subscribing, and your ad-free access will be automatically enabled.

Donate with
PayPal
Cash.app
Recent PagesClick to refresh
Texas County at Center of Border Fight Is Overwhelmed by Migrant Deaths EAGLE PASS, Tex. - The undertaker lighted a cigarette and held it between his latex-gloved fingers as he stood over the bloated body bag lying in the bed of his battered pickup truck. The woman had been fished out ...
Cheechako
3 days ago
Views: 154 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 1