Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness

[ihopehefails]

OK so with the recent SCOTUS ruling a corporation is for all intents and purposes is an individual with the right to free speech, however is not allowed to vote. (Hmmm seems to be a disconnect there somewhere.) So by your logic corporations should be able to rape the land, rape the consumer and rape the worker with little to no consequence? Money talks in the end because nothing else is worth listening to.

Are not corporations comprised of people? Do those people not have the right of free speech?

If a group of people be they a corporation or not pool their money to run ads for or against a candidate do they not have the right?

If not, do unions have the right to use their members money to run ads for or against a candidate?

And part of being free is the ability to leave a job if you don't like the way you're being treated. So if your boss is raping you, it's because you like it.

For the record I do not agree with any union, corporation or PAC being able to contribute to any political campaign. ONLY individuals should be allowed to contribute.

Why not? Why can't anyone contribute to any cause they want for any reason they have?

 

[Skull Pilot]

OK so with the recent SCOTUS ruling a corporation is for all intents and purposes is an individual with the right to free speech, however is not allowed to vote. (Hmmm seems to be a disconnect there somewhere.) So by your logic corporations should be able to rape the land, rape the consumer and rape the worker with little to no consequence? Money talks in the end because nothing else is worth listening to.

Are not corporations comprised of people? Do those people not have the right of free speech?

If a group of people be they a corporation or not pool their money to run ads for or against a candidate do they not have the right?

If not, do unions have the right to use their members money to run ads for or against a candidate?

And part of being free is the ability to leave a job if you don't like the way you're being treated. So if your boss is raping you, it's because you like it.

For the record I do not agree with any union, corporation or PAC being able to contribute to any political campaign. ONLY individuals should be allowed to contribute.

so 3 or 4 people can't buy ad time to advocate for a candidate?

Does that include the RNC and the DNC?

 

[lawbuff]

I believe the constitution states you can't enter someone's home without a search warrant.

Did not you just say case law was not created by judicial process so it does not count?? Now you say the Constitution says it. Make up your mind?? The 4th AM says no UNreasonable searches or seizures. Now tell me where the defintion of UNreasonable is, it sure is not in the statutory law, so I still can enter your home and just say it is reasonable, how will you defend yourself without case law?? Prove to me what I did was UNreasonable then.

I can always point to the constitution and say this was unreasonable for various reasons. They may or may not agree with me.

You call that a legal answer?? I don't.

I can come up with more examples, but you would just bypass them too.

 

[ihopehefails]

Did not you just say case law was not created by judicial process so it does not count?? Now you say the Constitution says it. Make up your mind?? The 4th AM says no UNreasonable searches or seizures. Now tell me where the defintion of UNreasonable is, it sure is not in the statutory law, so I still can enter your home and just say it is reasonable, how will you defend yourself without case law?? Prove to me what I did was UNreasonable then.

I can always point to the constitution and say this was unreasonable for various reasons. They may or may not agree with me.

You call that a legal answer?? I don't.

I can come up with more examples, but you would just bypass them too.

Why should I or anyone be subject to any interpretation of any law that does not resemble how it was originally created?

Let say citizens pass new XYZ amendment to the constitution that does ABC thing but the courts through case law reimagine it to do MNOP thing. Does this sound like something that follows the will of the people?

 

[lawbuff]

I can always point to the constitution and say this was unreasonable for various reasons. They may or may not agree with me.

You call that a legal answer?? I don't.

I can come up with more examples, but you would just bypass them too.

Why should I or anyone be subject to any interpretation of any law that does not resemble how it was originally created?

Let say citizens pass new XYZ amendment to the constitution that does ABC thing but the courts through case law reimagine it to do MNOP thing. Does this sound like something that follows the will of the people?

I could answer that but it won't do any good, I've tried before. The Federalist papers are not an A list of what is reasonable or unreasonable concerning the 4th, so I'll bow out here.

 

[CMike]

Corporations are made up of? Guess what? People.

Corporations are not chairs.

The ruling stated that newspapers are part of corporations too. They have the right to put in ads about candidates. The Supreme Court said that there is not basis in law to separate free speech based on different types of corporations.

Why are you so afraid of free speech?

 

[skookerasbil]

I've read this and nowhere does it say justice, equality, and the pursuit of other utopia.

The next time liberals get upset about supposed injustice, inequality, and just being upset that you are not going along with their version of utopia just remind them that our government was not created to do those things. They were created to preserve the freedom of the individual at all cost even if allowing that freedom creates injustice, inequality, or interferes with the creation of utopia.

Life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness is from the Declaration of Independence. While they are inspirational words, they are not legally binding
What is legally binding is the Constitution which does, in fact, talk about justice and equality.
The utopia crap is just right wing nonsense. Liberals never use it

Holy Christ...........is this bozo beyond gone or what??!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Nobody correlates "utopia" and people on the right!! Nobody.

The whole world knows that the social engineering espoused by the left is nothing more than search for utopia. The k00ks have been fiddling with it for 3,000 years and have only fcukked up the social dynamic even more.

Liberal public policy doesnt work...............never has...........never will. Of course liberals never "use it" but the perception ( 95% of reality ) has always been that liberals are in eternal search of bliss for all = utopia. Its the old good intentions vs results thing...........liberals couldnt give a rats ass about the results of the the public policy they espouse. If the intentions are good................thats all that matters.


No better example of this was the liberal public policy ideals that brought America "The Great Society" of the 1960's. In 1959, illegitimacy rates amongst black women was 19%..........then came all the welfare programs of the 1960s. Just 15 years later, the same illegitimacy rates amongs black women were at............ready for this sh!t...........79 fcukking % !!!! 79%!!! Only liberals can fcukk something up that bad within 15 years!! You find the same results with forced bussing for desegregation and low income housing in the 1960's...............A FCUKKING DISASTER FOR AMERICA!!!! You grow government and the majority gets fcukked in the process..........its not even debatable!!! In the 1970's, liberals devised the brilliant "Community Reinvestment Act", thus ensuring that over the proceeding 30 years, everybody would own a fcukking house!!! Result? GIGANTIC housing crash in 2008!! THATS WHAT HAPPENS when you provide credit to non-credit worthy buyers.

But hey.............the intentions were good!!!!



And lets all face it...........the movement to trample the Consistution was on display just the other night during the State Of Confusion speech. Right there in front of the Supreme Court Obama said, "Fcukk the First Ammendment.............me and the k00ks dont believe in it!!!"

 

[FireGod]

For the record I do not agree with any union, corporation or PAC being able to contribute to any political campaign. ONLY individuals should be allowed to contribute.

Why not? Why can't anyone contribute to any cause they want for any reason they have?

Any voter can, any non voter may not.

For the record I do not agree with any union, corporation or PAC being able to contribute to any political campaign. ONLY individuals should be allowed to contribute.

so 3 or 4 people can't buy ad time to advocate for a candidate?

Does that include the RNC and the DNC?

X number of voters make out X number of checks to ABC no problem.
RNC and DNC are essentially PACs right nor are they single voters so no.

I as an individual voter can not fight against a corporation/union/PAC/whatever to any real effect. My only power is that of a voter PERIOD. For me to be able to even possibly have any effect in the political process I have only my words and vote. Life is not fair and I acknowledge that. I do believe that one of the US founding documents included the phrase;
"government by the people, for the people and of the people" not "government by the corporations/union/PAC/whatever, for the corporations/union/PAC/whatever and of the corporations/union/PAC/whatever".

I am all for making a dollar honestly. I am all for voters being able to be heard and counted. I am very concerned that the election process is tainted and is going to get worse. The result is a nation where real individual people do not really exist any more and the corporation with the most money wins. Our Representatives are not supposed to be in it for the money or as a career. It is supposed to be a public service to serve as a Representative. Until we as a nation come back to that thought process, I am of the opinion that then the nation as a whole will continue to suffer. You can not convince me that nonvoter corporations/union/PAC/whatever are looking the big picture in making a decision to back a candidate. The individual must, if it is a informed thought out decision.

 

[NYcarbineer]

I've read this and nowhere does it say justice, equality, and the pursuit of other utopia.

The next time liberals get upset about supposed injustice, inequality, and just being upset that you are not going along with their version of utopia just remind them that our government was not created to do those things. They were created to preserve the freedom of the individual at all cost even if allowing that freedom creates injustice, inequality, or interferes with the creation of utopia.

Really? Nowhere does it say equality? The passage begins, we hold these truths to be self-evident, THAT ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL...

Justice? Preamble: We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, ESTABLISH JUSTICE...

You, my friend, are a simpleton.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Simply put folks, in no document is 'equality of outcome" addressed.. yet we keep trying to make sure nobody has any more than anyone else either through progressive taxation or other confiscatory policies. It is a doomed endeavor.

 

[skookerasbil]

I've read this and nowhere does it say justice, equality, and the pursuit of other utopia.

The next time liberals get upset about supposed injustice, inequality, and just being upset that you are not going along with their version of utopia just remind them that our government was not created to do those things. They were created to preserve the freedom of the individual at all cost even if allowing that freedom creates injustice, inequality, or interferes with the creation of utopia.

Really? Nowhere does it say equality? The passage begins, we hold these truths to be self-evident, THAT ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL...

Justice? Preamble: We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, ESTABLISH JUSTICE...

You, my friend, are a simpleton.

Whatever you say s0n..................



[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tibLjnn_Nf4&feature=player_embedded]YouTube - Midget[/ame]

 

[rightwinger]

Life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness is from the Declaration of Independence. While they are inspirational words, they are not legally binding
What is legally binding is the Constitution which does, in fact, talk about justice and equality.

Constitutional law, however, states we have the right to "engage in the common occupations of life" and to enjoy the "orderly pursuit of happiness".

Where is that written in the constitution?

14th amendment

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. Equality

5th amendment

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation Justice


Like I said....your "utopia" crap is just nonsense

 

[☭proletarian☭]

I've read this and nowhere does it say justice, equality, and the pursuit of other utopia.

The next time liberals get upset about supposed injustice, inequality, and just being upset that you are not going along with their version of utopia just remind them that our government was not created to do those things. They were created to preserve the freedom of the individual at all cost even if allowing that freedom creates injustice, inequality, or interferes with the creation of utopia.

Yes, those evil liberals with their women's suffrage and civil rights

 

[rightwinger]

Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I've read this and nowhere does it say justice, equality, and the pursuit of other utopia.

Show me where anyone on the left or right, other than you has ever claimed a right to live in a utopia

 

[☭proletarian☭]

I've read this and nowhere does it say justice, equality, and the pursuit of other utopia.

The next time liberals get upset about supposed injustice, inequality, and just being upset that you are not going along with their version of utopia just remind them that our government was not created to do those things. They were created to preserve the freedom of the individual at all cost even if allowing that freedom creates injustice, inequality, or interferes with the creation of utopia.

Life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness is from the Declaration of Independence. While they are inspirational words, they are not legally binding
What is legally binding is the Constitution which does, in fact, talk about justice and equality.
The utopia crap is just right wing nonsense. Liberals never use it

I've looked in the federalist papers and can't find one place where it says that the constitution is there to create utopia or a just society.

 

[☭proletarian☭]

The whole world knows that the social engineering espoused by the left is nothing more than search for utopia. The k00ks have been fiddling with it for 3,000 years and have only fcukked up the social dynamic even more.

Liberal public policy doesnt work...............never has...........never will.

civil rights - Google Search

women's suffrage - Google Search

WORKERS RIGHTS - Google Search

LABOUR MOVEMENTY - Google Search

anti trust laws - Google Search

 

[NYcarbineer]

Simply put folks, in no document is 'equality of outcome" addressed.. yet we keep trying to make sure nobody has any more than anyone else either through progressive taxation or other confiscatory policies. It is a doomed endeavor.

Hey, Grandma, do you have ANY idea how much less progressive our income tax is compared to where it was, say, in Eisenhower's time? Or Kennedy? Or Nixon?

 

[CMike]

For the record I do not agree with any union, corporation or PAC being able to contribute to any political campaign. ONLY individuals should be allowed to contribute.

Why not? Why can't anyone contribute to any cause they want for any reason they have?

Any voter can, any non voter may not.

For the record I do not agree with any union, corporation or PAC being able to contribute to any political campaign. ONLY individuals should be allowed to contribute.

so 3 or 4 people can't buy ad time to advocate for a candidate?

Does that include the RNC and the DNC?

X number of voters make out X number of checks to ABC no problem.
RNC and DNC are essentially PACs right nor are they single voters so no.

I as an individual voter can not fight against a corporation/union/PAC/whatever to any real effect. My only power is that of a voter PERIOD. For me to be able to even possibly have any effect in the political process I have only my words and vote. Life is not fair and I acknowledge that. I do believe that one of the US founding documents included the phrase;
"government by the people, for the people and of the people" not "government by the corporations/union/PAC/whatever, for the corporations/union/PAC/whatever and of the corporations/union/PAC/whatever".

I am all for making a dollar honestly. I am all for voters being able to be heard and counted. I am very concerned that the election process is tainted and is going to get worse. The result is a nation where real individual people do not really exist any more and the corporation with the most money wins. Our Representatives are not supposed to be in it for the money or as a career. It is supposed to be a public service to serve as a Representative. Until we as a nation come back to that thought process, I am of the opinion that then the nation as a whole will continue to suffer. You can not convince me that nonvoter corporations/union/PAC/whatever are looking the big picture in making a decision to back a candidate. The individual must, if it is a informed thought out decision.

Somewhere there is a PAC or lobbing group that advocates what you want.

 

[FireGod]

Somewhere there is a PAC or lobbing group that advocates what you want.

That is not the point that I am making.

 

[CMike]

It's the point that I am making. There is a group that represents you.

That group has the right to free speech.