Me finding a hiding placeThey Did IT
It is official a corporation is more of a person than you would think.
Sad but true.
All I can say is, I am not surprised.
Justice John Paul Stevens read a long dissent from the bench. He said the majority had committed a grave error in treating corporate speech the same as that of human beings. His decision was joined by the other three members of the court’s liberal wing.(from the NY Times article)
I can see that the story says unions too. Oh joy. What about Lobbies? What about "citizens' groups"? Small and really small businesses? Let's all have at it! If you have lots and lots of money, have a good time. If you don't, well, sorry. (Not really, no one is sorry for the lack of power for the poor. They might actually have something to say.)
Well maybe the unions will pay attention to their members' wishes. That will be some balance to corporate spending. But, I fear with the loss of power and membership Unions won't be enough.
Maybe, just maybe, Congress will get busy and try again? Nah, they need all the money and future jobs they can get.
As you can probably tell, I don't like this one at all.
I don't like it either. I can't express right now how much I don't like it. I will try to get back in a moment and add more comment...
ReplyDeleteI am just shaking my head over this one.
ReplyDeleteI never cease to be amazed at people.
They, the right that pays attention, love these judges. Yet I'll bet there are many "tea partiers" that either don't know or don't get it.
How on the one hand can they be yelling about the president not doing anything about Wall Street. Yet, they won't have much to say about this form of corp. power.
Just nice.
Be careful what you wish for you may get it.
The Supreme Court just gave up it's power, too- as time goes by, especially.
ReplyDeleteI am pondering how these people (tea partiers) can be so against government and not see that the corporations are going to be a worse taskmaster than they could have ever imagined in their poor feverish heads.
Well, these are some of the same people who "don't want government between them and their docs."
ReplyDeleteI can't believe they don't know the insurance companies have been getting worse about telling doctors and patients what they can and cannot do or what prescriptions they should or should not use.
I know I have been through the insurance nightmare for years. Where there is money involved someone will always try to grab more.
Now with Pres. Obama getting the banking message from voters Wall Street will make us pay. There goes more of our retirement.
I agree he needs to break up the "too big too fail" but I know our retirement accounts will pay further for the original greed of Wall Street.
Kanna,
ReplyDeleteI found this slipup amusing.
I call it “when so-called ‘Liberals’ ignorantly smear their own.”
P.S.) the NYT got part of their analysis correct when they noted that:
“the government has no business regulating political speech.”
PERIOD!
This was a victory for liberty and a blow against Dim tyranny.
P.S.) Anyone opposed to corporate bailouts should petition Obama to find a better candidate to lead the Fed.
ReplyDeleteP.P.S.) The dirty little secret which the NYT will NEVER tell you is that the bailout for Fannie and Freddie (the Clinton created epicenter of the housing mess) makes AIG look like chump change.
ReplyDeleteFannie and Freddie now have a freaking BLANK CHECK from we, the tax payers!
See this paragraph in this post.
There is talk of scrapping Fannie and Freddie and establishing some changes in the system which will probably hide more of the money and not really fix things. Real estate and housing had kept the economy going and making people wealthy up till the crash and that was fed in a bipartisan effort with the banks as the primary culprit, but we know that they have lobbyists and other programs to protect capitalism as we know it today. (Free markets don't exist in a protectionist environment; they are not compatible.) True freedom does not exist in a protected environment. Security does not equal freedom. The Republicans want their cake and yet they have already eaten it. They have led the American people astray and right into a totalitarian government. I am too poor to do anything about it, too. The banks and other corporations have been winning for years because of the fearful republicans and conservatives who don't understand what government for the people by the people means. They have destroyed us because they are afraid.
ReplyDeleteThomas sez (without substantiation, as usual):
ReplyDelete“the crash… was fed in a bipartisan effort with the banks as the primary culprit”
Thomas, you are -- quite simply -- demonstrably WRONG! But, I see you have “learned” from Little Robbie Reich that if you repeat an utterly unsubstantiated, bald faced LIE often enough, it becomes accepted as fact.
Click here for a primer on what caused the housing mess.
Click here for the bigger picture (including undeniable PROOF of the undeniable FACT that Dims endlessly promoted these follies and Republicans where the ONLY ones who tried to reign them in).
While we are exposing -- with substantiated quantitative FACTS -- bald faced lies from the Dims, click here and examine the QUANTITATIVE FACTS about “Big Spending Dims”.
Wow, I feel honored.
ReplyDeleteI wondered when SBVOR would visit here.
And just when I was about to thank him for not using the name-calling tactic, he does it.
I really appreciate that I was not called an idiot. I was thrilled that I didn't get the pat on my little head treatment either.
I know he and I could play "my-reference-is- better-than-your-reference" game or maybe the "I-will-take-partial-quotes-out-of-context" game but that won't solve any of our differences.
Bless his heart.
As far as Fannie and Freddie go I am very aware of their "corp" greed problems.
The NY Times, among others, covered it way back. Go ahead take my word for it. I am too lazy to go hunt that bunch of references again.
I do know that the great Cato Institute Handbook for Policymakers recommends doing away with Fannie and Freddie. As well as recommending how to regulate the regulations for monetary policy.
When I watched the House hearings on CSPAN the other day the phrase about the oft repeated lie becoming accepted was bandied about. This time though it was democrats using it to respond to republicans on regulation bills in 2009 about regulating Fannie and Freddie in particular.
Such fun, politics.
Anyway you guys have at it, if you wish.
Thanks for the comments.
Thomas, as always, is a person who will SUPPORT us pathetic little bloggers whether he agrees or not. I always appreciate it.
Right now I do not feel I need to further defend myself or my views.
Have Fun.
OOPS not a well written sentence:
ReplyDeleteThomas, as always, is a person who will SUPPORT us pathetic little bloggers whether he agrees or not. I always appreciate it.
I mean support by commenting often and politely when we write about anything. He often offers encouragement so that we peons keep writing.
Kanna,
ReplyDeleteThanks for the confidence a very nice compliment. I believe in the need to hear from the "peons". I find most of them are more interesting than the almighty journalists and other experts who are so great. I also think blogging brings people together to share thought and experience. I was a little busy with something that I didn't want to quit on till I hit the publish button, or I would have responded earlier.
Kanna asserts:
ReplyDelete“As far as Fannie and Freddie go I am very aware of their ‘corp’ greed problems.”
Corp greed? Are you FREAKING KIDDING ME?
Do you have any clue what Fannie and Freddie are, who runs them and who created the need for their UNLIMITED BAILOUTS (thereby wrecking the ENTIRE global economy)?
GEEZ! Dims!
SBVOR:
ReplyDeleteI will post answers to you accusation on my blog, maybe, if I want to. But, I won't continue this here. Sorry but I don't think it will serve to edify anyone or enlighten the issue that Kanna originally posted about.
SBVOR,
ReplyDeleteI knew that one would get ya.
Sorry, just couldn't help myself.
Of course my definition of "corp. greed" is different than yours.
Thanks.