Well after the court made a landmark decision about campaign finance reform the only color any should worry about is green. Companies are going to be able to give unlimited funds as long as it is declared. By the way Palin was not running for President, being from Alaska or being an idiot has little to do with McCain. With his age and wisdom he should have srved him better. He should have been a bit truer to himself. All this sh-- about him finding out on the fly that his running mate was a chump says as much about him as it does her. What is the color of a shill?
-
The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to
In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.
Thanks!
- Status
Thoughtforfood said:
I need to read the opinion first. There are times the court will reach the unpopular decision for the right reasons, just like it more often will find in favor of a popular decision for the wrong reasons.
As for the money, I notice there are numerous companies that are willing to throw money at both sides of the political spectrum. On a personal level, I would have much less problems with cutting all funding from corporations, if the court would treat unions equally. In the end, our political process has grown to the point where nothing will clean it up - and, if you look back into history, it has never been that clean anyway.
Thoughtforfood said:
I certainly am in favor of alternative energy sources as they become viable and cost effective.
I am sure if their intended audience could figure out how to operate a radio, the ratings would have been higher. Maybe Obama can bail them out, he has plenty of that (urgently needed I MEAN RIGHT NOW) stimulus money still unspent.
PLUS: It's already a manure shoveling project.
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Air-America-Radio-closing-apf-431347943.html?x=0
PLUS: It's already a manure shoveling project.
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Air-America-Radio-closing-apf-431347943.html?x=0
Thoughtforfood said:
TFF needed that to realize it was a hoax and a swindle? Why? Because he wanted to believe it was real in the first place....
When you start with your conclusion FIRST and then try and assemble facts later to support it, it's bound to run into trouble...
ravens said:
He Tweedle Dumb, I am very well read on the subject, and if you'd care to look, I have always said that the prevailing scientific opinion was that there was a man made contribution, but that the people doing the actual science were clear to point out that this was a very complicated problem, and was still under further investigation. See, it is the politicians who come in with the on or off button. The scientists are just doing their jobs for the most part. You didn't believe in it before any clear conclusion was brought forth (still waiting on that one if you care to READ something) because Gore made a movie. He could have said water was wet, and a political hack like you would disagree. Blow it out your propaganda hole dittohead. Partisan turd pushers like you are a real waste of freedom.
What do you know, even NASA must be in on the conspiracy: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/22/science/earth/22warming.html
CentralCaliBike said:
I am hard pressed to think of a good reason for making it even easier to buy politicians.
Thoughtforfood said:
I'm still trying to figure out who will be scoring the big windfall from the "global warming swindle".
Maybe Gore plans on syndicating the movie?
Hugh Januss said:
The best counter to it is boycott of products. Let Exxon promote a specific candidate, and then the people who like the other guy can stop buying the product. That is all we have, but it is a much more powerful tool than people understand. They have to disclose who they are, and where the money comes from. Of course, they can set up a new company with a new name and fund from that, making discovery of the puppet master a bit more difficult for your average voter to know who that company is. Their ruling relies on the First Amendment, and is solid in one sense. My problem is that it diminishes the single vote of the individual because of the undue influence of an entity that cannot vote, but does have far greater resources than all but a handful of individuals. That influence is far greater than any individual or small group because of the ability to buy elections with a profusion of advertising. We are hurtling down a dangerous path in our country. Just wait to see how the Republicans attack bank reform. Funny, they were all screaming about the bail-out, but they will scream just as loud about regulating the banks so that bubbles like that are less likely to form. Corporation already pull the strings. They have no allegiance to any country (they will move their plants and jobs for a 1% greater margin of profit) and Republicans seem convinced that is a good thing. I could go on for days, but what's the point?
These companies typically (use to at least) poor tons of money into both political parties. They wouldn't isolate themselves so easily for the consumer to figure out.
scribe said:
Now, they can strategically work on specific races. Say you have a very popular congressional candidate who opposes off shore drilling, oil companies will then pour resources into defeating that candidate, while modestly funding others from both parties. They can effectively keep out politicians with strong opinions and keep a pro business slanted politicians in power regardless of the letter in front of their name. Now we will have politicians in terror of taking a strong stance against any major corporate enterprise for fear of dying on the vine. Yes we already have that, and yes it is currently a dirty, dirty game, but it is child's play compared to where we are headed after today's ruling.
Funny story: Monsanto corporation owns the genetic patent rights to a genetically modified corn that is drought resistant. Farmers cannot keep the seed from their plants for planting the next year because Monsanto owns the patent, and that infringes on their right. Clarence Thomas wrote the opinion that gave them the right to patent the DNA and also the ability to sue and put out of business any farmer who opposes them. Clarence Thomas used to be a lawyer for Monsanto. Today, Thomas was the only one who dissented on the topic of whether corporation had to disclose their involvement with political advertisements. The other 8 at least got that part right. However, corporations got what they really wanted, an unfettered ability to buy elections. Something that my vote (the one that our founders held very dear), has little in the way of power to do.
ravens said:
And you aren't.
But please, PLEASE keep pushing the moronic hockey mom as your ideal candidate because that really will decide whether it is just better to leave the country to dimwits like you and your ilk. Good thing for you is that you probably won't have to worry about a big scary black man being president any time soon.
Thoughtforfood said:
Time to pack up your shopping cart and stand at the off ramp of the autobahn with your hand out. Same crap, different continent! Don't forget your cardboard sign! "Clueless Lib, any pfennigs appreciated. God Bless. "
ravens said:
Not a lib. Jersey wearing morons like you who are not capable of understanding the complexities of issues divide up people like that. I don't vote for a letter, I vote for ideas. People like you fall for whatever Rush tells you to think and will be the downfall of a great nation. Have fun in Stupidland...of course, the game isn't over. I for one believe that most people are smarter than are you, and will reject the politics of stupidity promoted by Bachmann and Palin. That is my litmus test. I sincerely hope we don't fail it, but there are people like you out there...
And again, please keep pushing Palin. I sincerely want to see a vote on whether the majority of people think someone like her is capable of running a country. It will make my choice easier.
Which one are you?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mKKKgua7wQk
I'm voting for the fat girl in the Lord of the Rings hoodie.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mKKKgua7wQk
I'm voting for the fat girl in the Lord of the Rings hoodie.
Thoughtforfood said:
Yes, you are real complex. People that swallow the climate scam are really deep thinkers. You struggle to assemble a half witted insult. Herd thinkers don't excel at originality.
I am giving you the rest of the night off. The mods don't like it when I pick on mouth breathing libs. Picking on you is sort of like picking on the snot faced kid that bags my groceries. Probably because you ARE the snot faced kid that bags my groceries.
Have a sparkling day!
Ravens - I'm not exactly sure what you support, as you haven't said anything concrete that I can find. Only complaining about Obama and the "liberals". TFF is just assuming you support all Sarah Palin stands for, but I'd like to hear it out of your words. If you were President, or a Senate or House leader, what would you propose to better the country? Not trying to bait anything. I'm actually looking for an honest discussion.
The term "tea bagger" has now been fleeced and a marketing tool for anyone in the Republican party who doesn't want to be weighed down by the Bush "neoconservatives". The loose definition of tea bagger was briefly applied to the Ron Paul faction, and those of similar philosophy (Peter Schiff, for example). But most people now clamoring to fit into that growing camp would happily ignore half of what Paul strongly proposed in the GOP primary debates (like blowback, and getting out of Iraq/Afghanistan immediately).
As I have said before, the terms "liberal" and "conservative" don't really mean anything either. They are just buzz word insults, rubber terms to be stretched to all things to all people. There is no real left/right that any politician truly advocates. If one were to be consistent by this simpleton idiology there would be totalitarian communists on one "side", and no-government anarchists on the other. But there's not a single politician in the United States advocating either of those.
Today's Supreme Court ruling is hugely disappointing, to say the least, as it rolls back bribery to levels not seen in a century. There is almost nothing stopping wealthy groups, be that corporations or unions or whatever, from directly giving money to politicians as a contribution in exchange for their vote as a discussion. Stunning that the Supreme Court consider money to be free speech, and corporations or unions equal to individuals.
If Obama really wanted to do something to better the country, in next Wednesday's State of the Union address he'd prioritize massive campaign finance and lobby reform and spend most of the hour talking about it. He advocated it in the past as a Senator, but I have little hope he'll even mention it.
What a sad and sick system we have all around.
The term "tea bagger" has now been fleeced and a marketing tool for anyone in the Republican party who doesn't want to be weighed down by the Bush "neoconservatives". The loose definition of tea bagger was briefly applied to the Ron Paul faction, and those of similar philosophy (Peter Schiff, for example). But most people now clamoring to fit into that growing camp would happily ignore half of what Paul strongly proposed in the GOP primary debates (like blowback, and getting out of Iraq/Afghanistan immediately).
As I have said before, the terms "liberal" and "conservative" don't really mean anything either. They are just buzz word insults, rubber terms to be stretched to all things to all people. There is no real left/right that any politician truly advocates. If one were to be consistent by this simpleton idiology there would be totalitarian communists on one "side", and no-government anarchists on the other. But there's not a single politician in the United States advocating either of those.
Today's Supreme Court ruling is hugely disappointing, to say the least, as it rolls back bribery to levels not seen in a century. There is almost nothing stopping wealthy groups, be that corporations or unions or whatever, from directly giving money to politicians as a contribution in exchange for their vote as a discussion. Stunning that the Supreme Court consider money to be free speech, and corporations or unions equal to individuals.
If Obama really wanted to do something to better the country, in next Wednesday's State of the Union address he'd prioritize massive campaign finance and lobby reform and spend most of the hour talking about it. He advocated it in the past as a Senator, but I have little hope he'll even mention it.
What a sad and sick system we have all around.
Alpe d'Huez said:
It's not even that simple, there are left and right anarchists.
And both fascism (Mussolini's Italy) and state-socialism (USSR) were both authoritarian but from different political persuasions.
And then there are libertarians, they typically wish the state to enforce property rights and maintain a strong military, happy to see people starve (or die of preventable illness) if markets don't miraculously provide them with food (or medicine), but not typically {evolution, climate-change, science, marriage-rights} deniers.
So how does one choose representatives in a two-party system?
I'm with Chomsky on this, representative "democracy" is only slightly better than monarchy.
"Democracy is the worst form of government except all those other forms that have been tried" (Winston Churchill)
I don't like the pseudo-democracy i see today, in belgium, in europe, in the US. But i don't know anything better...
I don't like the pseudo-democracy i see today, in belgium, in europe, in the US. But i don't know anything better...
- Status
TRENDING THREADS
-
Liege Bastogne Liege-7 hour monument, Sunday, April 21, 2024- Started by topcat
- Replies: 978
-
-
Paris - Roubaix 2024, one day monument, April 7- Started by Dreginald
- Replies: 2K
-
-
-
Volta Ciclista a Catalunya 2024 (March 18-24)- Started by Devil's Elbow
- Replies: 2K
-
De Ronde van Vlaanderen (270.8 km), 2024 March 31 (Sunday)- Started by Netserk
- Replies: 1K
Latest posts
-
77th Tour de Romandie (2.UWT) // 23rd - 28th of April 2024- Latest: Landeirovic
-
-
Presidential Cycling Tour of Turkey 2024, 21st to 28th April- Latest: GenericBoonenFan
-
-
-
Teams & Riders The Great Big Cycling Transfers, Extensions, and Rumours Thread
- Latest: GenericBoonenFan
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram