If a Corporation claims the rights of an individual, then it must be taxed that way

[Vast LWC]

Of course, according to "Dude", my "ass was kicked" on this thread. I find that to be an interesting interpretation.

 

[Vast LWC]

And of course, here's another big problem with this:

A Corporation is run by it's largest shareholders. Often these shareholder make up a minority of the total.

Which means that the largest shareholders are possibly making decision that 90% of the total shareholders don't agree with, and using their money to do so.

 

[The Rabbi]

Of course, according to "Dude", my "ass was kicked" on this thread. I find that to be an interesting interpretation.

I find it to be a correct interpretation. But it isn't hard kicking butt when someone offers something so amazingly stupid.
So let's recap: You're OK with corporations producing the worst most offensive smut on the planet but for them to engage in constitutionally-protected political speech is a no-no. Do I have that right?

 

[Vast LWC]

Of course, according to "Dude", my "ass was kicked" on this thread. I find that to be an interesting interpretation.

I find it to be a correct interpretation. But it isn't hard kicking butt when someone offers something so amazingly stupid.
So let's recap: You're OK with corporations producing the worst most offensive smut on the planet but for them to engage in constitutionally-protected political speech is a no-no. Do I have that right?

Look, I don't think corporations are inherently "evil". Here is what worries me about unbridled corporate access to the political process:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/102862-i-dont-think-corporations-are-inherently-evil.html

I'm trying to link this in several threads that were carrying on the same conversation, so I don't end up repeating myself in all of them.

 

[Revere]

They were not given rights of individuals. A corporation can't vote.

Free speech is what it is. It is not subject to what group you belong to or your politics.