"Von" wrote in message
...
"Ed Huntress" wrote in
:


"Mark Rand" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 21 Jan 2010 00:59:39 -0500, "Ed Huntress"

wrote:


An effort to reform health care; to bring Guantanamo prisoners
into the US prison system; and to regulate non-bank-banks and to
re-regulate commercial
bank/investment bank combinations.

And what have the Republicans done? Resisted every step of the
way, with the
help of a few conservative Democrats.

This Congress sucks worse than most, and the Democrats in
Congress suck plenty. But the irrational, ideological and
political resistance to some needed changes goes beyond
stupidity. It's reprehensible politicization of the country's
well-being. The stupidity of it is beyond belief.


America, the land of the free, where anything/one can be bought
for enough money ;-)


Mark Rand
RTFM

Well, pard', the Supreme Court made it official today: Businesses
and unions can spend as much as they want to for political
campaigns, advertising, and so on. Any Congressman who makes a
deal with them now can write his own ticket.

We're for sale! How much money ya' got? We're not cheap, but the
view is great. You can see Russia from here!



I guess I just don't understand why unions and corporations have all
the rights as people and it seems more. Where is it in the
Constitution that gives them this right? Not being a constitutional
scolar I would really like to know what the rational is for this.

It's a debatable point, which is why we got a 5:4 decision. An "originalist"
(conservative) would say they have the right under the 1st Amendment. A
normal person would say that treating corporations or unions as "people" is
absurd. The legal "person" status of corporations was established solely to
limit their liability, to make it easier for them to attract investors.
Originally, it was a strictly commercial decision.

The people in the corporations already have the right to contribute to
whomever they want to.


The news report I saw also postulated that soon the Supreme court
will give them the right to contribute directly to political
candidates, something that hasn't been allowed for over a hundred
years.

Maybe. I haven't read the decision. It may be limited to advertising and
other promotion. But I've read two contradictory accounts of that point so
far.

However, the power they have now, under PACs, is not to be sneezed at. It
was already too much, IMO.


Yes I do believe you are right, in the next couple of election cycles
our goverenment will be truly bought and paid for by corporations and
we (the USA) will become a corporate state run by and for
corporations.

Von

The corporatism is starting to look alarming. It appears that the Supreme
Court has decided that the Constitution *is* a suicide pact, after all.

You'll know for sure if the motto on the dollar bill is changed from "In God
We Trust" to "Always Low Prices." Wal-Mart gave it up as a slogan so it may
be available.

--
Ed Huntress