Now we have to go after the Supreme Court.
What is going on with these courts? Now that we have more or less gained some kind of control over the Congress. We get blindsided my what I deem to be a corrupted Supreme Court.
Have the corporate wolf packs gotten to the Supreme Court? With the decision that was handed down recently that corporations can give money to political campaigns, it would seem that they got to some of them. These people are suppose to interpret the Constitution.
I don't think that the Founding Fathers ever wrote anything like this decision into the Constitution, I don't care how it's interpreted. The decision has given the corporate establishment an open door to steal elections by buying votes and taking away our right of choice, our right to have our votes counted. They have given corporations the keys to our house! They have given them the right to come into our homes and do whatever they want ! It has opened the door to a propaganda machine that can mesmerize the voters into making decisions without much debate. This is very dangerous, and anti-Democratic. The Supreme Court is wrong and we have to find a way to stop them from making unconstitutional decisions like the one they have just made.
We must strike down this Supreme Court and their decisions, We need to establish more than ever, Term limits and the Line item veto. I would even say that we could Amend the Constitution and set term limits for the Supreme Court.
Within the checks and balances theory , the Supreme Court is the only branch of governmnet that cannot be checked by the American people. That kind of power should not belong to any one government organization. That can be very dangerous as it is evidenced by their most resent undemocratic decision.
Come on people, lets show them whom they are dealing with!
What say you America?
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Aline McKay on -
Only McCain and other progressives liked his amendment! I was thrilled that it was rescinded. I couldn't believe he was doing it to us when he did it. That's when I knew he was not a conservative.
-
Permalink Reply by tony santurio on -
What are you talking about punishing the wealthy and the successful and not let them participate in the voting process. What writings are you reading ? I'm sure I never said anything of the sort. We are talking about the soulless, mindless Corporate entity . An entity that was given privileges by us to have liability protection to be protected against us and tax shelters also given to them by us. for we are the government are we not ?.
The only problem is that most Americans live with their heads stuck up their butts and they do not bother to learn about the political process of their country. Hell I bet i can find 100 Americans that know almost nothing about the Revolutionary war. You are another that needs to be kicked in the ass so you'll wake up and see what is going on under your very nose.
In as far as the movie about Hillary , that could have been lawyer ed up and taken care of without all this pomp and circumstance. If there was a timely motion to block the movie presented then case closed. If there was not, then case closed. I think that the Supreme Court legislated from the bench. I think that there is more to this than meets the eye. One of the things that this country is very adept at is running distractions to keep us from being able to realize what really is going on.
Here's is something to think about. China's economy is booming, they are lending us money by the trillions, why? Why are these Congressmen in Washington so inept at financial planning? Spending money without our permission! You know that the U.S. is in a cold war with China over oil deposits found in some countries in Africa? Did you also know that The largest Chinese Construction Contractor has just (won a bid) to install a 1.9 billion ventilation system in the subways in Manhattan, New York. Are they going to use American workers? Or maybe they have Chinese immigrants ready with American citizenship's , or at least residence status?. Maybe the officers that run the Contracting company became citizens and they are using their new found voice to control the political process in America.
Or maybe they are already collecting on our debt to them by getting construction contracts in America. Money that they lent us we pay back by hiring them! Where does the American worker fit in all of this? I thought that the money they borrowed supposedly from China, was to be used as a stimulus to start rebuilding the American infrastructure and give American workers jobs? I don't know about you but I see something going on that doesn't fit the rhetoric coming from Washington.
Why did the justices not speak up when Barack Obama blocked all attempts to find out anything about his background. What happened to our freedom of speech , then? We have the right to challenge anyone one seeking to run our White House! We where basically told to shut up. We where blocked by someone that controlled the media and a lot of Congress people. To this day we have not had any questions answered formally about who is the person in the White House! Some voted for a person to be President who's background is in question! Don't you find that kind of odd?
We where handcuffed and driven by a system that did not want to upset the cart about an African American being the first President, Why? There is a lot more than meets the eye. The Congress ignoring the American peoples rights, The Chinese connection in construction and in the cold war with us in Africa.
Corporations are not citizens of the United Sates. They present a clear and present danger to the political process. Those people involved in any Corporations are suppose to be American citizens or have permanent residence status. All are protected by the Constitution.
-
Permalink Reply by Gregg Olsen on
-
Wow Tony, and to think your brother Smitty called us nuts.
You will find many more like minded individuals on the Daily Kos website.
-
Permalink Reply by Smitty on
-
Mr. Olsen,
My calling everybody nuts, wasn't about content in their replies. Everyone has some constructive observations in their contributions. I was referring to the conversation going in circles and the fact that this conversation was started on a limited decision by the Court and has expanded into other areas.
The decision didn't change anything that already existed. Any legislation that was or has been inacted has been skirted by all for many years by, for profit, non-profit organizations and even private citizens.
And to your referrence to him being my brother, we are kindred spirits not blood related.
My disagreements with him are not based on correctness, it is in his approach and how he comes to his conclusions. He makes valid points in his observations and so do others including you.
My opposition to some conversations are that everyone's positions are based on interpretations of the Bill of Rights. Everyone is doing the same thing that the Courts are doing. The very thing they oppose.
My position is that the main body, the actual Constitution, the seven (7) articles that were ratified before the Bill of Rights were even written, is where the corruption starts. Fix that, cut the head of the snake. The rest will fall in line. The three branches have stepped over their limited line. Then elect Representatives that will uphold the very oath they took, to represent the People and follow the Constitution not interpret it.
That's where I stand, repectfully Smitty
-
Permalink Reply by tony santurio on
-
Justice Thomas speaks about assembly. OK how many employees do you really believe assemble with the shareholders and officers of a large Corporation to discuss Corporate political policies. I think Justice Thomas stretches the freedom of speech Amendment a little. Do workers in Corporations vote on issues that may be contrary to Corporate policy and if there is a majority will the Corporation act on it, even if the decision of the workers may be detrimental to the Corporation, but good for the welfare of the employee?
Who decides the corporate political policy? Who decides how much money will be used?
There are a lot of questions that need to be answered. Is a Corporation a Democracy or a Hierarchy?
I would start there.
-
Permalink Reply by Gregg Olsen on
-
You are mixing oranges and apples as well as completely missing the point.
A corporation is not a political entity. It is in the business of commerce (typically). The owners of a corporation (Shareholders) elect the Board of Directors (Directors) whom hire the officers of the corporation to run the affairs of the business (Officers) who conduct the corporations business including hiring employees. If employees wish to vote on the decisions and activities of the business all they need to do is purchase shares in the corporation.
If you hire a house cleaner to clean your house should they have a vote in your family affairs? No, unless she becomes a member of the family through marriage, adoption, etc.
We are a Republic not a Democracy. A lynch mob is a democracy.
A business is neither a Democracy or a Hierarchy unless their Officers choose to be such, with the blessing of the Directors, with the approval of the Shareholders. In a free society they are free to be.
-
Permalink Reply by GUY ZINO on -
Yes, which is why if we really had a LIMITED Federal government that stayed OUT of the market place and couldn't influence the behavior of the markets by passing laws favoring some industry over another, etc, then there would be no one to bribe to pass laws that put some at an unfair advantage over others. We are putting our attention on symptoms, like campaign finance reform, lobbyists and the like. These are symptoms of what you get when the government's influence becomes too extended and all pervasive. Just work on getting the government out of our lives and it will all eventually even out. Sounds idealistic but that is the ultimate solution. Until then we are just applying calamine lotion to our skin while we continue to sit in the poison ivy.
-
Permalink Reply by Gregg Olsen on
-
Tony are you familiar with the Pareto Theory
-
Permalink Reply by Gregg Olsen on
-
Tony you have had several people shed light on the issue and you do not see. Let's try a step by step approach. What is your take on what Justice Thomas said at http://www.breitbart.tv/audio-justice-defends-supreme-courts-campai...
Do you agree or disagree?
-
Permalink Reply by tony santurio on
-
Gregg , I have also had several people agree with me! What is your point? I read Justice Stevens Opinion which confirms what I think! I think his opinion is a lot more important to me than yours and the others that have tried show me what I do not see! Unfortunately like everything else with a lot of Americans you need to get kicked in the ass before you understand what really is going on right under your nose. Freedom of Speech is being distorted! Corporations are going to end up running this country if they are not already.
But time will tell unfortunately.
-
Permalink Reply by Charles Hutchinson on -
NICE obfuscation. Do you agree with Justice Thomas, or are you in bed with a progressive like Stevens?
-
Permalink Reply by tony santurio on
-
My dear Charles, it is so nice that you have decided to banter with me .
I must confess that I love it. I will put out a disclaimer though. all that is said is in the spirit of debate. Nothing is personal or meant to be insulting, just combative!
Now,
Let us study the word progressive shall we. What does that word mean? The dictionary has a definition we can start there; progressive ! Moving forward, ongoing advancing 2. Proceeding in steps, continuing steadily by increments. 3. Promoting or favoring political reform, liberal. 4. Capital P. Or of belonging to a progressive party. I have no problem with any of these definitions. As long as the progress is of a positive nature. I think that we must study exactly what we want. Throwing words around means nothing unless there's an ideal, a theory that brings the welfare of the citizen to the forefront of Government policies. I go to bed with whom is going to make me comfortable in all ways, I would like it to be an upstanding woman who knows her own mind.I'm a single man! In as far as a political mistress I can tell you that my bed has been empty for a long time, and it shall remain that way forever. What I can do is make it uncomfortable for you to lay on your bed. Who are you in bed with? I said that I agreed with Stevens in as far as this decision. I have read other decisions by him I don't agree with. You see that is the freedom that we have . We do not have to get in bed with anyone. we just have to agree or disagree. That's what I find strange. you seem to think that you have to be someones whore or you can't participate in the process. Well I'm no ones bitch. You on the other hand might take a look at yourself and see where you really stand
© 2010 Created by Eric Odom.
Powered by 
.
