Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
The motherfucker is pointing out your false premise.. Regardless as to whether or not the motherfucker agrees with your conclusion. I realize this is advanced thinking. Like, college level. So, your inability to properly comprehend this isn't really surprising.
Now turn and tell yourself why you disagree with yourself.
Too much money in politics and its bad for Voters. I.E. Citizens, Americans, Everyone else.
If its bad for all of us I am against it. So are you. Stop your bitching
Make a logical fucking argument,
and i wont have to point out your fallacies. I never agreed with your premise, I still do not, because it is a false one. Your conclusion, however, as broad as it is, I do agree with on CU. NOT on money in politics. My view there is vastly different from yours on multiple levels, and for entirely different reasons.
Whose fault is that though? It's the individual voters. We all have a responsibility as citizens of this great nation to educate ourselves. We have a duty to know what's going on and to act based on wisdom instead of soundbytes.
If we fail to live up to our responsibilities, we get what we deserve.
To educate ourselves you say. How do you "educate" someone who is willfully ignorant?
I see people get "educated" right on this board. And I'll be damned if the person who received the benefit of the education, they come right back the next day and say the exact same shit that they got educated on the day before.
I guess in short I would say; you can't fix stupid. And we have a bunch of stupid people who vote in this country.
We have failed in our responsibilities TO EACH OTHER. We ignore the fact we have responsibilities to each other. Why do so many worship the ultra wealthy? Why do so many vote against their own self interest? Why has our literacy rates and critical thinking skills devolved?
Why you think that is?
If you are so ignorant that you don't know how to educate yourself, then I dont know that I can help you. But i recommend starting with books. Look at facts. Learn how to think and analyze. Learn how to ask questions. Learn logic. etc Basics really.
No one can educate you. You can only educate yourself.
YOu should be thanking me for helping you not sound like a moron. Instead you congratulate me on agreeing with you and throw out "sanity".
Do you fucks even realize how stupid you look most of the time?
C'mere bitch
Do I really need to spell it out for you again? Seriously? Or are you simply trolling over it to attempt to unwrinkle that trainwreck of a premise you put forth?
To educate ourselves you say. How do you "educate" someone who is willfully ignorant?
I see people get "educated" right on this board. And I'll be damned if the person who received the benefit of the education, they come right back the next day and say the exact same shit that they got educated on the day before.
I guess in short I would say; you can't fix stupid. And we have a bunch of stupid people who vote in this country.
We have failed in our responsibilities TO EACH OTHER. We ignore the fact we have responsibilities to each other. Why do so many worship the ultra wealthy? Why do so many vote against their own self interest? Why has our literacy rates and critical thinking skills devolved?
Why you think that is?
If you are so ignorant that you don't know how to educate yourself, then I dont know that I can help you. But i recommend starting with books. Look at facts. Learn how to think and analyze. Learn how to ask questions. Learn logic. etc Basics really.
No one can educate you. You can only educate yourself.
LMAO. So much for teachers.
Fuck you. And here I thought you weren't as stupid as I first thought. Then I will be damned if you don't post up right away and prove once again how fucking stupid you are. Ah well, who gives a flying fuck. I was just making conversation.
But nice of you to prove once again that you can't fix stupid. And make no doubt about it, you are stupid.
No, it did not.
You'll have to forgive him. He doesn't realize everyone has the right to marry. Just not the right to redefine marriage.
Well, that's not really what i was after. There is absolutely no correlation that can be drawn to show that A)Because religous groups ran ads regarding gay marriage, that B) gays were denied marriage.
it's another "pushing on a string" argument that can not be quantified, or qualified in the least. It's simply intolerance for others displaying publically, and advocating an opposing view.
Nearly six years after the ruling, we have yet to see the disastrous results predicted by so many around here, not to mention the President, when he said "this ruling strikes at our democracy itself" and "I can't think of anything more devastating to the public interest".
I have yet to hear a cogent argument that justifies restriction of first amendment rights. And all that "corporations are now people" talk? Pure bullshit. Bottom line, the ruling did NOT result in our elections being bankrolled by foreign entities nor any of the other end-of-the-world predictions made around here.
An interesting clip...5 things you man not have know about the case:
You havent heard what is wrong with it? It give people with money more value to their "speech" than others.
Of course to you Repubs and Dems are representing the people, right? They arent in the pockets of the monied class....Let me hear you say it.
But you wont, because to pretend money has no influence and UNLIMITED money has NO Influence you would have to be either a retarded fool or a foolish retard.
Go ahead, tell everyone how money means nothing. When you refuse to do it then you'll know the problem with Citizens United and unlimited contributions to Politicians.
To level set, the finding held that the First Amendment prohibits the government from restricting political expenditures by corporations, associations, or labor unions. The case came about after Citizens United wanted to air a film critical of Hillary Clinton, which ran afoul of the 2002 Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (commonly known as the McCainFeingold Act). The case did not involve the federal ban on direct contributions from corporations or unions to candidate campaigns or political parties, which remain illegal in races for federal office.
Nearly six years after the ruling, we have yet to see the disastrous results predicted by so many around here, not to mention the President, when he said "this ruling strikes at our democracy itself" and "I can't think of anything more devastating to the public interest".
I have yet to hear a cogent argument that justifies restriction of first amendment rights. And all that "corporations are now people" talk? Pure bullshit. Bottom line, the ruling did NOT result in our elections being bankrolled by foreign entities nor any of the other end-of-the-world predictions made around here.
An interesting clip...5 things you man not have know about the case:
5 Things You Didn't Know About Citizens United - YouTube
Speech is good. More speech is better.
You're an idiot. I write that based on the body of your work posted on this message board and your claim the CU v. FEC is about free speech. It is not. It's about five justices deciding that anonymous sources may spend money & make claims on issues to be decided in an election.
Speech is good, but not given behind a curtain, and that curtain may very well be iron or bamboo.
Corporations are not people, notwithstanding the opinion of Romney and others. They, as well as political action committees of every size and shape are amoral, and have one and only one concern - their own well being.
Suggesting money does not buy elections is absurd, even the most dishonest partisan knows that it has and can. Sadly some partisan - like you? - lie and claim otherwise.
Do you really want to allow our nation to become a Plutocracy, one where the rich make all the rules? Not most of them as is done today. It really is time to take our government back, from the Plutocrats in Congress and in boardrooms across the nation.
So Obama bought the last two elections and you're not complaining about it?
Nearly six years after the ruling, we have yet to see the disastrous results predicted by so many around here, not to mention the President, when he said "this ruling strikes at our democracy itself" and "I can't think of anything more devastating to the public interest".
I have yet to hear a cogent argument that justifies restriction of first amendment rights. And all that "corporations are now people" talk? Pure bullshit. Bottom line, the ruling did NOT result in our elections being bankrolled by foreign entities nor any of the other end-of-the-world predictions made around here.
An interesting clip...5 things you man not have know about the case:
You havent heard what is wrong with it? It give people with money more value to their "speech" than others.
Of course to you Repubs and Dems are representing the people, right? They arent in the pockets of the monied class....Let me hear you say it.
But you wont, because to pretend money has no influence and UNLIMITED money has NO Influence you would have to be either a retarded fool or a foolish retard.
Go ahead, tell everyone how money means nothing. When you refuse to do it then you'll know the problem with Citizens United and unlimited contributions to Politicians.
Incredible, even after incontrovertible proof that you are wrong, you insist the Citizen's United ENDED THE WORLD AS WE KNEW IT. Corporations aren't spending massive amounts of money on politics, people can make a difference by actually being allowed to say what they want, but you want to make everything different because you are scared.
So Obama bought the last two elections and you're not complaining about it?
Yep, and I do complain about it. But that's because I'm honest and not a lying partisan hack like you. Look at my signature! The CU v. FEC ruling was the death knell for our democratic republic.
Of course the Plutocrats and their fellow travelers - witted, dim or half - want to change democratic republic to constitutional republic, while deciding the 'real' meaning of every phrase written within the law of our land to fit within their ideology.
To level set, the finding held that the First Amendment prohibits the government from restricting political expenditures by corporations, associations, or labor unions. The case came about after Citizens United wanted to air a film critical of Hillary Clinton, which ran afoul of the 2002 Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (commonly known as the McCainFeingold Act). The case did not involve the federal ban on direct contributions from corporations or unions to candidate campaigns or political parties, which remain illegal in races for federal office.
Nearly six years after the ruling, we have yet to see the disastrous results predicted by so many around here, not to mention the President, when he said "this ruling strikes at our democracy itself" and "I can't think of anything more devastating to the public interest".
I have yet to hear a cogent argument that justifies restriction of first amendment rights. And all that "corporations are now people" talk? Pure bullshit. Bottom line, the ruling did NOT result in our elections being bankrolled by foreign entities nor any of the other end-of-the-world predictions made around here.
An interesting clip...5 things you man not have know about the case:
5 Things You Didn't Know About Citizens United - YouTube
Speech is good. More speech is better.
Citizens United doesn't allow for direct contributions. Those are banned for federal elections from unions or corporations. CU is about allowing electioneering communications. While the ruling isn't favorable from an individual perspective, it does n't allow for the "buying of elections". That's simply incorrect, propaganda nonsense formulated by Dimocrats in the 2010 electino cycle to make their losses about CU. Which, was another failure of LOlberals.
You talk alot about what it doesnt do. Tell everyone what it DOES do.
It allows anyone to put UNLIMITED funds into the pockets of Politicians.
Using your own thoughts. Why is this good? Dont start up with "Liberals think blah blah" try talking about what you believe for a change
Yep, and I do complain about it. But that's because I'm honest and not a lying partisan hack like you. Look at my signature! The CU v. FEC ruling was the death knell for our democratic republic.
Of course the Plutocrats and their fellow travelers - witted, dim or half - want to change democratic republic to constitutional republic, while deciding the 'real' meaning of every phrase written within the law of our land to fit within their ideology.
First complaint I've heard from you. And you calling other people partisan hacks is absolutely
Because I disagree with almost everything the right supports does not make me a partisan hack. Now, what do I support?
Equal rights for all citizens
Social Security
Medicare
Medicaid
Universal preventative health care, cradle to grave
The United Nations
Progressive taxation
Immigration reform
Labor rights (i.e. collective bargaining)
The Line-Item Veto for the POTUS
A comprehensive employment and training act
Rational gun control
Repeal of CU v. FEC
A Code of Judicial Ethics, applicable to the US Supreme Court
a Dollar and two-dollar coin to replace paper money.
Fiscal sanity.
Repair, rebuild, renew the nations infrastructure.
Criminal sanctions for libel and slander against public officials.
It was and still is a bad decision. We should be REMOVING money from the political process not injecting more.
It was and still is a bad decision. We should be REMOVING money from the political process not injecting more.
^^This
Takeastep what is wrong with this position?
So Obama bought the last two elections and you're not complaining about it?
Yep, and I do complain about it. But that's because I'm honest and not a lying partisan hack like you. Look at my signature! The CU v. FEC ruling was the death knell for our democratic republic.
Of course the Plutocrats and their fellow travelers - witted, dim or half - want to change democratic republic to constitutional republic, while deciding the 'real' meaning of every phrase written within the law of our land to fit within their ideology.
Because being able to talk about the government in anything but positive, glowing, terms is going to RUIN EVERYTHING.
Speech is good. More speech is better.
