Is it ok for Google to contribute to any politican?

[playtime]

That is called free speech. What has it to do with contributions to political campaigns?

Free speech? and depriving those of free speech for views I don't like?

It's called private property. Right wingers generally promote the freedom of the individual to do what one wants with it without government interference. Does this no longer apply across the board? Did right wingers suddenly find the concept of relativism to their liking?

so it's ok for a political party to control all information on the internet in your opinion?

Political parties don't control the flow of information on the internet.

Yes, it does when their supporters and contributors control the flow. And you wonder why we call fake news fake news.

nooooooooooooo.... *you* call it fake news 'cause donny calls it fake news......................

 

[playtime]

Yes or no.

You conservitards really need to rethink that whole Citizens United thing.

Funny how you thought it was a good think when the Koch Bros were dumping buckets of money over your candidates but don't think it's so grand when it's on the other side of the aisle.

Just for the record I have said it was a bad idea all along and still think it is even if my "side" may be benefitting from it for a change.

The bucket of money a Koch brother can dump on a candidate is no bigger than the bucket you or I have.

PAC money my dear.... PAC money. wayne laPIEere may not legally contribute more, but the NRA pumped ( i believe) $40 million into donny's campaign & lookey how fast he backtracked - again - with these 2 latest massacres, cause they were getting pissy with all his talk about increasing some background checks & he sure wants to keep getting that money.

 

[Defiant1]

Yes or no.

You conservitards really need to rethink that whole Citizens United thing.

Funny how you thought it was a good think when the Koch Bros were dumping buckets of money over your candidates but don't think it's so grand when it's on the other side of the aisle.

Just for the record I have said it was a bad idea all along and still think it is even if my "side" may be benefitting from it for a change.

The bucket of money a Koch brother can dump on a candidate is no bigger than the bucket you or I have.

PAC money my dear.... PAC money. wayne laPIEere may not legally contribute more, but the NRA pumped ( i believe) $40 million into donny's campaign & lookey how fast he backtracked - again - with these 2 latest massacres, cause they were getting pissy with all his talk about increasing some background checks & he sure wants to keep getting that money.

Wow!!!!! Have you contacted the FEC?
This would be huge!!!!!!!

https://www.fec.gov/resources/cms-content/documents/contribution_limits_chart_2019-2020.pdf

 

[playtime]

Yes or no.

You conservitards really need to rethink that whole Citizens United thing.

Funny how you thought it was a good think when the Koch Bros were dumping buckets of money over your candidates but don't think it's so grand when it's on the other side of the aisle.

Just for the record I have said it was a bad idea all along and still think it is even if my "side" may be benefitting from it for a change.

The bucket of money a Koch brother can dump on a candidate is no bigger than the bucket you or I have.

PAC money my dear.... PAC money. wayne laPIEere may not legally contribute more, but the NRA pumped ( i believe) $40 million into donny's campaign & lookey how fast he backtracked - again - with these 2 latest massacres, cause they were getting pissy with all his talk about increasing some background checks & he sure wants to keep getting that money.

Wow!!!!! Have you contacted the FEC?
This would be huge!!!!!!!

https://www.fec.gov/resources/cms-content/documents/contribution_limits_chart_2019-2020.pdf

you fool - i'm not just talking about 'individual ' di-rect contributions.... you don't think the barrage of propaganda & media time devoted to bashing hillary & promoting donny ( & their agenda) didn't add up?

Which lawmakers got the most NRA money?

• By soo rin kim Feb 20, 2018, 8:51 PM ET

[...]
During just the 2016 election cycle, the NRA spent $54 million in the presidential and congressional races, nearly $20 million of which went to attacking Democrat Hillary Clinton and more than $11 million to support Republican Donald Trump. In 2008 and 2012, the group had spent $18 million opposing Democrat Barack Obama and $10 million supporting Republicans John McCain and Mitt Romney.
[...]
Which lawmakers got the most NRA money?

 

[Defiant1]

Yes or no.

You conservitards really need to rethink that whole Citizens United thing.

Funny how you thought it was a good think when the Koch Bros were dumping buckets of money over your candidates but don't think it's so grand when it's on the other side of the aisle.

Just for the record I have said it was a bad idea all along and still think it is even if my "side" may be benefitting from it for a change.

The bucket of money a Koch brother can dump on a candidate is no bigger than the bucket you or I have.

PAC money my dear.... PAC money. wayne laPIEere may not legally contribute more, but the NRA pumped ( i believe) $40 million into donny's campaign & lookey how fast he backtracked - again - with these 2 latest massacres, cause they were getting pissy with all his talk about increasing some background checks & he sure wants to keep getting that money.

Wow!!!!! Have you contacted the FEC?
This would be huge!!!!!!!

https://www.fec.gov/resources/cms-content/documents/contribution_limits_chart_2019-2020.pdf

you fool - i'm not just talking about 'individual ' di-rect contributions.... you don't think the barrage of propaganda & media time devoted to bashing hillary & promoting donny ( & their agenda) didn't add up?

Which lawmakers got the most NRA money?

• By soo rin kim Feb 20, 2018, 8:51 PM ET

[...]
During just the 2016 election cycle, the NRA spent $54 million in the presidential and congressional races, nearly $20 million of which went to attacking Democrat Hillary Clinton and more than $11 million to support Republican Donald Trump. In 2008 and 2012, the group had spent $18 million opposing Democrat Barack Obama and $10 million supporting Republicans John McCain and Mitt Romney.
[...]
Which lawmakers got the most NRA money?

That list included PACs.
How much an individual can contribute to a PAC.
The limit a PAC can contribute to a candidate.

What NRA PAC are you talking about?
I can't find an NRA PAC on the FEC site.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Free speech? and depriving those of free speech for views I don't like?

It's called private property. Right wingers generally promote the freedom of the individual to do what one wants with it without government interference. Does this no longer apply across the board? Did right wingers suddenly find the concept of relativism to their liking?

so it's ok for a political party to control all information on the internet in your opinion?

Political parties don't control the flow of information on the internet.

Yes, it does when their supporters and contributors control the flow. And you wonder why we call fake news fake news.

nooooooooooooo.... *you* call it fake news 'cause donny calls it fake news......................

How is it that you think Russia influenced America's election and google who controls the information released on the internet didn't influence the election?

 

[Dana7360]

Yes or no.

No it's not. But I don't believe it's right for any business whether it's incorporated or not to be able to contribute to any politician.

I don't believe any business is a person and I don't believe money is speech.

I don't care what business it is or what politician.

There's way too much money in politics.

 

[Slyhunter]

Yes or no.

No it's not. But I don't believe it's right for any business whether it's incorporated or not to be able to contribute to any politician.

I don't believe any business is a person and I don't believe money is speech.

I don't care what business it is or what politician.

There's way too much money in politics.

A corporation is made up of stockholders who are people. It's like a Pac.

 

[Invisibleflash]

Whatever law says OP.

 

[Brain357]

It's called private property. Right wingers generally promote the freedom of the individual to do what one wants with it without government interference. Does this no longer apply across the board? Did right wingers suddenly find the concept of relativism to their liking?

so it's ok for a political party to control all information on the internet in your opinion?

Political parties don't control the flow of information on the internet.

Yes, it does when their supporters and contributors control the flow. And you wonder why we call fake news fake news.

nooooooooooooo.... *you* call it fake news 'cause donny calls it fake news......................

How is it that you think Russia influenced America's election and google who controls the information released on the internet didn't influence the election?

You think google got deficit Donald elected?

 

[Dana7360]

Yes or no.

No it's not. But I don't believe it's right for any business whether it's incorporated or not to be able to contribute to any politician.

I don't believe any business is a person and I don't believe money is speech.

I don't care what business it is or what politician.

There's way too much money in politics.

A corporation is made up of stockholders who are people. It's like a Pac.

Take away the people and It's just an empty building filled with desks and machinery.

The reason why people incorporate is to separate the business from the owners. Once a business is incorporated it's a totally separate entity from those who own it. That would be the stockholders.

That business can't do anything a human does. It needs a human to exist.

So if you take away the humans it can't exist or do anything. That's not a human or life.

Yes the conservatives on the Supreme Court have ruled that a corporation is a person but I don't have to agree with it. I just have to accept it. I can hope that it can be changed one day.

Money isn't speech. What money does is buy more speech than those who don't have the money to buy it.

I don't have millions to start a PAC then flood the media with my views. The koch brothers can and do. In fact have been doing for decades. Even before Citizens United. With Citizens United they basically have very few rules to follow and they don't even follow those rules. The government doesn't do anything about it either. The koch brothers aren't the only ones who do that but they are the most well known.

So I disagree. Business isn't a person and money isn't speech.

 

[Lakhota]

As long as we're going to allow money to pollute & distort politics, and as long as we refuse to require term limits, this is going to happen.

We can bitch and moan about it all we want, but we're ignoring the bigger picture. We're certainly good at that.

What about Microsoft? or any internet entity that has control of the information on the internet?

You mean like Fox News?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

As long as we're going to allow money to pollute & distort politics, and as long as we refuse to require term limits, this is going to happen.

We can bitch and moan about it all we want, but we're ignoring the bigger picture. We're certainly good at that.

What about Microsoft? or any internet entity that has control of the information on the internet?

You mean like Fox News?

Fox news is no different from any other mainstream media why is FOX RELEVANT TO YOU?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

so it's ok for a political party to control all information on the internet in your opinion?

Political parties don't control the flow of information on the internet.

Yes, it does when their supporters and contributors control the flow. And you wonder why we call fake news fake news.

nooooooooooooo.... *you* call it fake news 'cause donny calls it fake news......................

How is it that you think Russia influenced America's election and google who controls the information released on the internet didn't influence the election?

You think google got deficit Donald elected?

What gave you that idea? maybe you should watch the video's

 

[playtime]

You conservitards really need to rethink that whole Citizens United thing.

Funny how you thought it was a good think when the Koch Bros were dumping buckets of money over your candidates but don't think it's so grand when it's on the other side of the aisle.

Just for the record I have said it was a bad idea all along and still think it is even if my "side" may be benefitting from it for a change.

The bucket of money a Koch brother can dump on a candidate is no bigger than the bucket you or I have.

PAC money my dear.... PAC money. wayne laPIEere may not legally contribute more, but the NRA pumped ( i believe) $40 million into donny's campaign & lookey how fast he backtracked - again - with these 2 latest massacres, cause they were getting pissy with all his talk about increasing some background checks & he sure wants to keep getting that money.

Wow!!!!! Have you contacted the FEC?
This would be huge!!!!!!!

https://www.fec.gov/resources/cms-content/documents/contribution_limits_chart_2019-2020.pdf

you fool - i'm not just talking about 'individual ' di-rect contributions.... you don't think the barrage of propaganda & media time devoted to bashing hillary & promoting donny ( & their agenda) didn't add up?

Which lawmakers got the most NRA money?

• By soo rin kim Feb 20, 2018, 8:51 PM ET

[...]
During just the 2016 election cycle, the NRA spent $54 million in the presidential and congressional races, nearly $20 million of which went to attacking Democrat Hillary Clinton and more than $11 million to support Republican Donald Trump. In 2008 and 2012, the group had spent $18 million opposing Democrat Barack Obama and $10 million supporting Republicans John McCain and Mitt Romney.
[...]
Which lawmakers got the most NRA money?

That list included PACs.
How much an individual can contribute to a PAC.
The limit a PAC can contribute to a candidate.

What NRA PAC are you talking about?
I can't find an NRA PAC on the FEC site.

Reports filed with the Federal Election Commission show that the PAC and nonprofit arms of the NRA spent a combined $54.4 million in the 2016 elections. Most of that spending, $35.2 million, was channeled through the NRA Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA), the powerful lobbying arm of the NRA. As a 501(c)(4) social welfare organization, the NRA-ILA does not have to disclose the donors who fueled its record spending. And in 2016 elections alone, this “dark money” arm of the NRA spent as much as it had in every election going back to 1992, combined.

Grand Total Spent on 2016 Federal Elections: $54,398,558


Audit shows NRA spending surged $100 million amidst pro-Trump push in 2016

National Rifle Assn
Outside Spending Summary 2016
Select cycle:
Discloses Donors? PARTIAL
Viewpoint: Conservative
Type of group: PAC or Party Committee 501c

National Rifle Assn Outside Spending | OpenSecrets

 

[Brain357]

I’m pretty sure that conservative citizens united decision makes it ok.

 

[iceberg]

As long as we're going to allow money to pollute & distort politics, and as long as we refuse to require term limits, this is going to happen.

We can bitch and moan about it all we want, but we're ignoring the bigger picture. We're certainly good at that.

What about Microsoft? or any internet entity that has control of the information on the internet?

this is about ass-nugget stupid. microsoft doesn't control the internet for one. their own relevance is around software, not advertisting and info-flow. that's google and facebook. and while they have a lot of influence over what they allow on their own networks, go find another if you don't like theirs.

yes you have to dig. but you can be lazy and have it spoon fed or you can do your own research. (not YOU per se but any of us).

 

[iceberg]

As long as we're going to allow money to pollute & distort politics, and as long as we refuse to require term limits, this is going to happen.

We can bitch and moan about it all we want, but we're ignoring the bigger picture. We're certainly good at that.

What about Microsoft? or any internet entity that has control of the information on the internet?

I didn't realize Microsoft had control of all the information on the internet.

Bing is maintained by Microsoft.

and this is what i mean - all the info is out there. all you gotta do is go look.

Google vs. Bing? User Traits & Demographics; Where Best to Advertise

google still owns a bulk of the internet searches. but time does in fact take it's toll and people simply move on. i use opera for a browser when i can. i use duckduckgo for my own searches. google if i need pop culture answers. but bing is about as relevant as the bible in hotel night stands.

 

[iceberg]

as for google backing politicians - they can make donations like any business can to whomever they wish. where i draw the line is if they use the search engine to favor one side or the other; regardless of which side they may be favoring.

if they are working to favor candidates then i would say this is a party foul.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

As long as we're going to allow money to pollute & distort politics, and as long as we refuse to require term limits, this is going to happen.

We can bitch and moan about it all we want, but we're ignoring the bigger picture. We're certainly good at that.

What about Microsoft? or any internet entity that has control of the information on the internet?

I didn't realize Microsoft had control of all the information on the internet.

Bing is maintained by Microsoft.

and this is what i mean - all the info is out there. all you gotta do is go look.

Google vs. Bing? User Traits & Demographics; Where Best to Advertise

google still owns a bulk of the internet searches. but time does in fact take it's toll and people simply move on. i use opera for a browser when i can. i use duckduckgo for my own searches. google if i need pop culture answers. but bing is about as relevant as the bible in hotel night stands.

Bingo is Microsoft