Charles Koch's great big lie.

[Not2BSubjugated]

There is , up to a certain point, your statement is agreeable. However, when the Governor of Wisconsin was fooled by someone pretending to be one of the Koch brothers, that is what makes it completely different.\
When the average citizen and get the ear of their Governor for that length of time, then we have equal representation.
Also on another thought, when Citizens United is overturned by the Supreme Court of the United States, then we this country will making the right move to give EVERY citizen the same rights to petition their government and their representative, at all levels.

What defense does he need other than he is an American citizen, and he has the right to petition his government for a redress of grievances....and the protection to express his political views....

of course......to a leftist...there is no such freedom.....

If Citizens United is overturned then it is silencing the rights of every citizen.

No it isn't, what makes you say that??

You really don't understand Citizens United, do you, Care? Without it, you can only donate funds to campaigns as an individual, which means that if you, personally, have a shit ton of money, then you, personally, can have influence at election time. If you, personally, are somewhere in that middle class spectrum, then you, personally, don't have enough money to say shit.

When you allow corporations (and pull your head out of your preconceptions for just long enough to get a little daylight on your face and realize that the term corporations doesn't mean "big super rich multinational conglomerates" exclusively. . . it's literally any group of people who have incorporated) to exercise speech via advertising, it allows little middle class losers like you and me to come together into groups and combine funds until, as a corporation, we actually have enough money to exercise a little influence on behalf of the little guy (or our particular little collection of little guys). Citizens United is literally the only thing we have going for us right now as a nation that allows regular people to have a shot at a microphone during election cycles. Without it, only rich individuals get to exercise any real influence.

Bottom line, if you're gonna hop on board the new humanist/populist religion, at least do enough research to understand which aspects of society -actually- fit your goofy morals. Don't let the TV hippies install Pavlovian responses to simple terms like corporation into your psyche and then base your political opinions on the resulting knee-jerks, that shit ain't healthy or helpful for anyone involved.

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

There is such freedom to a leftist, but only if you're a leftist. If you're a leftist you not only have the right to petition our government for a redress of grievances, but the right to riot, trash and burn cities, shit on cop cars and make threats of terrorism.

How exactly do you define a leftist? Is it the same as a liberal? A Democrat? A progressive? The right wingers have such a wide range of ways to describe people who don't agree with them, but it's hard to know exactly how each term differs from the others, if they differ at all.

For me it's Socialist Liberals in both parties who use the word liberal or progressive to hide behind their political ideology of socialism.
None of them would be elected if they used the word socialist.
The reason that they can't get full socialism is because of our Constitution and that is why they want to get rid of it.

ok, but that really doesn't answer the question though does it?

If you mean the question is- Are they out to just make money, it is no- they are promoting freedom for all Americans to make money through their own businesses with less government interference.
High Corporate Taxes and too many regulations are choking them all.

That's not what I was asking at all. What exactly is a leftist, and how does that differ, if they do differ, from a Liberal, or Democrat, or Progressive? Are those all just different words to describe the same thing, or is there any specific difference between all the different ways right wingers refer to people who they disagree with?

I like how you indignantly ask for an explanation on whether a left-winger is the same as a liberal, a democrat, a progressive, obviously pointing out that it's foolish to try to lump so many different philosophies into one heading. . .

And then let us know that this is a tactic employed by "right wingers". LMFAO.

Now, when you say "right wingers", are you referring to Republicans? Conservatives? Libertarians? Classical Liberals?

Pot, meet Kettle.

 

[boilermaker55]

My point to the core. Let unions thrive .
Never has there been a post from the Union haters about CEO's and corporate boards and how they manipulate the economy to suite their needs.

There is , up to a certain point, your statement is agreeable. However, when the Governor of Wisconsin was fooled by someone pretending to be one of the Koch brothers, that is what makes it completely different.\
When the average citizen and get the ear of their Governor for that length of time, then we have equal representation.
Also on another thought, when Citizens United is overturned by the Supreme Court of the United States, then we this country will making the right move to give EVERY citizen the same rights to petition their government and their representative, at all levels.

What defense does he need other than he is an American citizen, and he has the right to petition his government for a redress of grievances....and the protection to express his political views....

of course......to a leftist...there is no such freedom.....

If Citizens United is overturned then it is silencing the rights of every citizen.

No it isn't, what makes you say that??

What is the difference between Unions and Corporations?
None
If it is leagal for Unions, it is legal for Corporations.
They are all citizens (unions and corporations) who are voicing their opinions and backing the people who they want to vote for, as quoted by boilermaker55 - to give EVERY citizen the same rights to petition their government and their representative, at all levels.

 

[boilermaker55]

My understanding of Citizens United is quite clear and quite understandable.
If you have no real conscious about what it has done to this country and its electability on candidates then keep on trucking
It is ethically wrong.

There is , up to a certain point, your statement is agreeable. However, when the Governor of Wisconsin was fooled by someone pretending to be one of the Koch brothers, that is what makes it completely different.\
When the average citizen and get the ear of their Governor for that length of time, then we have equal representation.
Also on another thought, when Citizens United is overturned by the Supreme Court of the United States, then we this country will making the right move to give EVERY citizen the same rights to petition their government and their representative, at all levels.

What defense does he need other than he is an American citizen, and he has the right to petition his government for a redress of grievances....and the protection to express his political views....

of course......to a leftist...there is no such freedom.....

If Citizens United is overturned then it is silencing the rights of every citizen.

No it isn't, what makes you say that??

You really don't understand Citizens United, do you, Care? Without it, you can only donate funds to campaigns as an individual, which means that if you, personally, have a shit ton of money, then you, personally, can have influence at election time. If you, personally, are somewhere in that middle class spectrum, then you, personally, don't have enough money to say shit.

When you allow corporations (and pull your head out of your preconceptions for just long enough to get a little daylight on your face and realize that the term corporations doesn't mean "big super rich multinational conglomerates" exclusively. . . it's literally any group of people who have incorporated) to exercise speech via advertising, it allows little middle class losers like you and me to come together into groups and combine funds until, as a corporation, we actually have enough money to exercise a little influence on behalf of the little guy (or our particular little collection of little guys). Citizens United is literally the only thing we have going for us right now as a nation that allows regular people to have a shot at a microphone during election cycles. Without it, only rich individuals get to exercise any real influence.

Bottom line, if you're gonna hop on board the new humanist/populist religion, at least do enough research to understand which aspects of society -actually- fit your goofy morals. Don't let the TV hippies install Pavlovian responses to simple terms like corporation into your psyche and then base your political opinions on the resulting knee-jerks, that shit ain't healthy or helpful for anyone involved.

 

[boilermaker55]

That is totally wrong.
1 Steyer, Thomas & F. & Kathryn Ann
Fahr LLC/Tom Steyer
San Francisco, CA $75,424,834 $75,422,334 $0 100% 0%
2 Bloomberg, Michael R.
City of New York, NY
New York, NY $28,549,392 $10,527,600 $515,200 95% 5%
3 Singer, Paul
Elliott Management
New York, NY $11,518,474 $0 $11,516,974 0% 100%
4 Mercer, Robert L. & Diana
Renaissance Technologies
East Setauket, NY $9,676,399 $0 $9,666,399 0% 100%
5 Eychaner, Fred
Newsweb Corp
Chicago, IL $9,669,400 $9,264,400 $250,000 97% 3%
6 Ricketts, John J. & Marlene M.
TD Ameritrade
Omaha, NE $8,987,721 $0 $8,987,721 0% 100%
7 Simons, James H. & Marilyn H.
Renaissance Technologies/Simons Fdtn
New York, NY $8,257,700 $8,224,700 $7,800 100% 0%
8 Uihlein, Richard & Elizabeth
Uline Inc
Lake Forest, IL $6,094,650 $0 $6,064,150 0% 100%
9 Adelson, Sheldon G. & Miriam O.
Las Vegas Sands/Adelson Drug Clinic
Las Vegas, NV $6,059,236 $0 $6,029,636 0% 100%
10 Koch, Charles G. & Elizabeth B.
Koch Industries
Wichita, KS $5,308,400 $0 $5,288,400 0% 100%
11 McNair, Robert
Houston Texans
HOUSTON, TX $4,291,300 $0 $4,276,300 0% 100%
12 Soros, George
Soros Fund Management
New York, NY $3,803,400 $3,763,400 $0 100% 0%
13 Griffin, Kenneth C. & Anne D.
Citadel Invest Group/Aragon Global Mgt
Chicago, IL $3,765,300 $0 $3,755,300 0% 100%
14 McMahon, Vincent K. & Linda E.
World Wrestling Entertainment
Greenwich, CT $3,371,050 $0 $3,354,300 0% 100%
15 Klarman, Seth A. & Beth S.
Baupost Group
Chestnut Hill, MA $3,301,740 $270,000 $3,026,740 8% 92%
16 Perenchio, A. Jerrold & Margaret
Chartwell Partners
Los Angeles, CA $3,234,000 $0 $3,234,000 0% 100%
17 Perry, Bob J. & Doylene
Perry Homes
Houston, TX $3,130,800 $0 $3,130,800 0% 100%
18 Marcus, George M. & Judith
Marcus & Millichap
Palo Alto, CA $3,098,000 $3,075,400 $2,600 100% 0%
19 Stephens, Warren
Stephens Inc
Little Rock, AR $3,090,100 $0 $3,085,100 0% 100%
20 Sussman, S. Donald
Paloma Partners
Greenwich, CT $3,074,894 $3,074,894 $0 100% 0%
21 Davis, Kenneth W. Jr.
Ken Davis Finance
Fort Worth, TX $2,938,995 $0 $2,931,195 0% 100%
22 Childs, John W. & Marlene I.
JW Childs Assoc
Vero Beach, FL $2,935,343 $0 $2,935,343 0%
More at....
Top Individual Contributors All Federal Contributions OpenSecrets

There is , up to a certain point, your statement is agreeable. However, when the Governor of Wisconsin was fooled by someone pretending to be one of the Koch brothers, that is what makes it completely different.\
When the average citizen and get the ear of their Governor for that length of time, then we have equal representation.
Also on another thought, when Citizens United is overturned by the Supreme Court of the United States, then we this country will making the right move to give EVERY citizen the same rights to petition their government and their representative, at all levels.

What defense does he need other than he is an American citizen, and he has the right to petition his government for a redress of grievances....and the protection to express his political views....

of course......to a leftist...there is no such freedom.....

If Citizens United is overturned then it is silencing the rights of every citizen.

No it isn't, what makes you say that??

What is the difference between Unions and Corporations?
None
If it is leagal for Unions, it is legal for Corporations.
They are all citizens (unions and corporations) who are voicing their opinions and backing the people who they want to vote for, as quoted by boilermaker55 - to give EVERY citizen the same rights to petition their government and their representative, at all levels.

And of course they don't realize that the biggest donors in the country are the unions...far and above everyone else.....

 

[boilermaker55]

Citizens United = Dark money

If Citizens United is overturned then it is silencing the rights of every citizen.

No it isn't, what makes you say that??

What is the difference between Unions and Corporations?
None
If it is leagal for Unions, it is legal for Corporations.
They are all citizens (unions and corporations) who are voicing their opinions and backing the people who they want to vote for, as quoted by boilermaker55 - to give EVERY citizen the same rights to petition their government and their representative, at all levels.

And of course they don't realize that the biggest donors in the country are the unions...far and above everyone else.....

Union exist to keep employers in check. Need evidence, read some history.

How do you know Union are the diggest donors in the country, and why should anyone believe you. Provide credible and probative evidence.

They all have to make them public for the people to see, It's the law.
Top Organization Contributors OpenSecrets

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

My understanding of Citizens United is quite clear and quite understandable.
If you have no real conscious about what it has done to this country and its electability on candidates then keep on trucking
It is ethically wrong.

There is , up to a certain point, your statement is agreeable. However, when the Governor of Wisconsin was fooled by someone pretending to be one of the Koch brothers, that is what makes it completely different.\
When the average citizen and get the ear of their Governor for that length of time, then we have equal representation.
Also on another thought, when Citizens United is overturned by the Supreme Court of the United States, then we this country will making the right move to give EVERY citizen the same rights to petition their government and their representative, at all levels.

What defense does he need other than he is an American citizen, and he has the right to petition his government for a redress of grievances....and the protection to express his political views....

of course......to a leftist...there is no such freedom.....

If Citizens United is overturned then it is silencing the rights of every citizen.

No it isn't, what makes you say that??

You really don't understand Citizens United, do you, Care? Without it, you can only donate funds to campaigns as an individual, which means that if you, personally, have a shit ton of money, then you, personally, can have influence at election time. If you, personally, are somewhere in that middle class spectrum, then you, personally, don't have enough money to say shit.

When you allow corporations (and pull your head out of your preconceptions for just long enough to get a little daylight on your face and realize that the term corporations doesn't mean "big super rich multinational conglomerates" exclusively. . . it's literally any group of people who have incorporated) to exercise speech via advertising, it allows little middle class losers like you and me to come together into groups and combine funds until, as a corporation, we actually have enough money to exercise a little influence on behalf of the little guy (or our particular little collection of little guys). Citizens United is literally the only thing we have going for us right now as a nation that allows regular people to have a shot at a microphone during election cycles. Without it, only rich individuals get to exercise any real influence.

Bottom line, if you're gonna hop on board the new humanist/populist religion, at least do enough research to understand which aspects of society -actually- fit your goofy morals. Don't let the TV hippies install Pavlovian responses to simple terms like corporation into your psyche and then base your political opinions on the resulting knee-jerks, that shit ain't healthy or helpful for anyone involved.

You say all that, but you offer no backing whatsoever. When someone responds to a complete argument with statements that they don't bother qualifying, it's usually because that person is incapable of logical debate or completely unequipped for the topic at hand, but I'm willing to make a leap of faith and ask you to clarify.

What has citizens united done to this country?

What is it about citizens united that is ethically wrong?

 

[Nyvin]

Citizens United is literally the only thing we have going for us right now as a nation that allows regular people to have a shot at a microphone during election cycles. Without it, only rich individuals get to exercise any real influence.

lol, you've gotta be kidding me...

 

[boilermaker55]

Your understanding is your understanding, That is all.
Citizens United = dark money
Read some history about money involved in any.........campaign.

My understanding of Citizens United is quite clear and quite understandable.
If you have no real conscious about what it has done to this country and its electability on candidates then keep on trucking
It is ethically wrong.

There is , up to a certain point, your statement is agreeable. However, when the Governor of Wisconsin was fooled by someone pretending to be one of the Koch brothers, that is what makes it completely different.\
When the average citizen and get the ear of their Governor for that length of time, then we have equal representation.
Also on another thought, when Citizens United is overturned by the Supreme Court of the United States, then we this country will making the right move to give EVERY citizen the same rights to petition their government and their representative, at all levels.

If Citizens United is overturned then it is silencing the rights of every citizen.

No it isn't, what makes you say that??

You really don't understand Citizens United, do you, Care? Without it, you can only donate funds to campaigns as an individual, which means that if you, personally, have a shit ton of money, then you, personally, can have influence at election time. If you, personally, are somewhere in that middle class spectrum, then you, personally, don't have enough money to say shit.

When you allow corporations (and pull your head out of your preconceptions for just long enough to get a little daylight on your face and realize that the term corporations doesn't mean "big super rich multinational conglomerates" exclusively. . . it's literally any group of people who have incorporated) to exercise speech via advertising, it allows little middle class losers like you and me to come together into groups and combine funds until, as a corporation, we actually have enough money to exercise a little influence on behalf of the little guy (or our particular little collection of little guys). Citizens United is literally the only thing we have going for us right now as a nation that allows regular people to have a shot at a microphone during election cycles. Without it, only rich individuals get to exercise any real influence.

Bottom line, if you're gonna hop on board the new humanist/populist religion, at least do enough research to understand which aspects of society -actually- fit your goofy morals. Don't let the TV hippies install Pavlovian responses to simple terms like corporation into your psyche and then base your political opinions on the resulting knee-jerks, that shit ain't healthy or helpful for anyone involved.

You say all that, but you offer no backing whatsoever. When someone responds to a complete argument with statements that they don't bother qualifying, it's usually because that person is incapable of logical debate or completely unequipped for the topic at hand, but I'm willing to make a leap of faith and ask you to clarify.

What has citizens united done to this country?

What is it about citizens united that is ethically wrong?

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

Citizens United is literally the only thing we have going for us right now as a nation that allows regular people to have a shot at a microphone during election cycles. Without it, only rich individuals get to exercise any real influence.

lol, you've gotta be kidding me...

Another one? You ridicule, but you offer no argument. If my statement is so ridiculous, it should be quite easy for you to point out where I'm wrong and why, yes?

 

[Nyvin]

We're a republic, not a democracy.

A Republic is a national government without a monarch.

A Democracy is giving citizens the right to vote either for elected leaders or legislation.

The United States is both.

Article 4 - The States
Section 4 - Republican Government
The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government.

Nowhere in our Constitution does it say Republican Democracy form of Government.
Our Republic gives the minorities rights which a democracy republic does not.
This is why it says Republic in our Constitution.

Literally all that phrase means is there is no official monarch heading our government, it's why the United "Kingdom" can't call itself a Republic and neither can Canada. they both recognize the Queen as their head of state. We elect leaders democratically and thus the United States is indeed a democracy. Look up Citizens for a Canadian Republic...they'll tell you why Canada isn't a Republic.

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

Your understanding is your understanding, That is all.
Citizens United = dark money
Read some history about money involved in any.........campaign.

My understanding of Citizens United is quite clear and quite understandable.
If you have no real conscious about what it has done to this country and its electability on candidates then keep on trucking
It is ethically wrong.

If Citizens United is overturned then it is silencing the rights of every citizen.

No it isn't, what makes you say that??

You really don't understand Citizens United, do you, Care? Without it, you can only donate funds to campaigns as an individual, which means that if you, personally, have a shit ton of money, then you, personally, can have influence at election time. If you, personally, are somewhere in that middle class spectrum, then you, personally, don't have enough money to say shit.

When you allow corporations (and pull your head out of your preconceptions for just long enough to get a little daylight on your face and realize that the term corporations doesn't mean "big super rich multinational conglomerates" exclusively. . . it's literally any group of people who have incorporated) to exercise speech via advertising, it allows little middle class losers like you and me to come together into groups and combine funds until, as a corporation, we actually have enough money to exercise a little influence on behalf of the little guy (or our particular little collection of little guys). Citizens United is literally the only thing we have going for us right now as a nation that allows regular people to have a shot at a microphone during election cycles. Without it, only rich individuals get to exercise any real influence.

Bottom line, if you're gonna hop on board the new humanist/populist religion, at least do enough research to understand which aspects of society -actually- fit your goofy morals. Don't let the TV hippies install Pavlovian responses to simple terms like corporation into your psyche and then base your political opinions on the resulting knee-jerks, that shit ain't healthy or helpful for anyone involved.

You say all that, but you offer no backing whatsoever. When someone responds to a complete argument with statements that they don't bother qualifying, it's usually because that person is incapable of logical debate or completely unequipped for the topic at hand, but I'm willing to make a leap of faith and ask you to clarify.

What has citizens united done to this country?

What is it about citizens united that is ethically wrong?

Dark money? Please, explain what you mean by dark money.

And don't tell me to go "read history". That's vague as shit and the debate tactic of a 6 year old. "I know the answer, I'm just not gonna tell you." Don't make an assertion and then disguise a flat refusal to qualify it as some sort of moral stance you're taking against my "ignorance". The only thing worse than being a prick is being a juvenile prick.

 

[peach174]

We're a republic, not a democracy.

A Republic is a national government without a monarch.

A Democracy is giving citizens the right to vote either for elected leaders or legislation.

The United States is both.

Article 4 - The States
Section 4 - Republican Government
The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government.

Nowhere in our Constitution does it say Republican Democracy form of Government.
Our Republic gives the minorities rights which a democracy republic does not.
This is why it says Republic in our Constitution.

Literally all that phrase means is there is no official monarch heading our government, it's why the United "Kingdom" can't call itself a Republic and neither can Canada. they both recognize the Queen as their head of state. We elect leaders democratically and thus the United States is indeed a democracy. Look up Citizens for a Canadian Republic...they'll tell you why Canada isn't a Republic.

Until many of this Nation understands that our Federal Government is set up to be limited you will not understand our Republic.

 

[Wry Catcher]

If Citizens United is overturned then it is silencing the rights of every citizen.

No it isn't, what makes you say that??

What is the difference between Unions and Corporations?
None
If it is leagal for Unions, it is legal for Corporations.
They are all citizens (unions and corporations) who are voicing their opinions and backing the people who they want to vote for, as quoted by boilermaker55 - to give EVERY citizen the same rights to petition their government and their representative, at all levels.

And of course they don't realize that the biggest donors in the country are the unions...far and above everyone else.....

Union exist to keep employers in check. Need evidence, read some history.

How do you know Union are the diggest donors in the country, and why should anyone believe you. Provide credible and probative evidence.

They all have to make them public for the people to see, It's the law.
Top Organization Contributors OpenSecrets

Hey, a very interesting link. First, thanks, it is very informative. A review settled the question as to which party represents the interests of he working person, and which party represents the monied class.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Your understanding is your understanding, That is all.
Citizens United = dark money
Read some history about money involved in any.........campaign.

My understanding of Citizens United is quite clear and quite understandable.
If you have no real conscious about what it has done to this country and its electability on candidates then keep on trucking
It is ethically wrong.

No it isn't, what makes you say that??

You really don't understand Citizens United, do you, Care? Without it, you can only donate funds to campaigns as an individual, which means that if you, personally, have a shit ton of money, then you, personally, can have influence at election time. If you, personally, are somewhere in that middle class spectrum, then you, personally, don't have enough money to say shit.

When you allow corporations (and pull your head out of your preconceptions for just long enough to get a little daylight on your face and realize that the term corporations doesn't mean "big super rich multinational conglomerates" exclusively. . . it's literally any group of people who have incorporated) to exercise speech via advertising, it allows little middle class losers like you and me to come together into groups and combine funds until, as a corporation, we actually have enough money to exercise a little influence on behalf of the little guy (or our particular little collection of little guys). Citizens United is literally the only thing we have going for us right now as a nation that allows regular people to have a shot at a microphone during election cycles. Without it, only rich individuals get to exercise any real influence.

Bottom line, if you're gonna hop on board the new humanist/populist religion, at least do enough research to understand which aspects of society -actually- fit your goofy morals. Don't let the TV hippies install Pavlovian responses to simple terms like corporation into your psyche and then base your political opinions on the resulting knee-jerks, that shit ain't healthy or helpful for anyone involved.

You say all that, but you offer no backing whatsoever. When someone responds to a complete argument with statements that they don't bother qualifying, it's usually because that person is incapable of logical debate or completely unequipped for the topic at hand, but I'm willing to make a leap of faith and ask you to clarify.

What has citizens united done to this country?

What is it about citizens united that is ethically wrong?

Dark money? Please, explain what you mean by dark money.

And don't tell me to go "read history". That's vague as shit and the debate tactic of a 6 year old. "I know the answer, I'm just not gonna tell you." Don't make an assertion and then disguise a flat refusal to qualify it as some sort of moral stance you're taking against my "ignorance". The only thing worse than being a prick is being a juvenile prick.

Dark money as I understand it is reported out as donated by Americans for Apple Pie, Baseball and Motherhood, or, The Swift Boat Veterans.

 

[bendog]

Your understanding is your understanding, That is all.
Citizens United = dark money
Read some history about money involved in any.........campaign.

My understanding of Citizens United is quite clear and quite understandable.
If you have no real conscious about what it has done to this country and its electability on candidates then keep on trucking
It is ethically wrong.

No it isn't, what makes you say that??

You really don't understand Citizens United, do you, Care? Without it, you can only donate funds to campaigns as an individual, which means that if you, personally, have a shit ton of money, then you, personally, can have influence at election time. If you, personally, are somewhere in that middle class spectrum, then you, personally, don't have enough money to say shit.

When you allow corporations (and pull your head out of your preconceptions for just long enough to get a little daylight on your face and realize that the term corporations doesn't mean "big super rich multinational conglomerates" exclusively. . . it's literally any group of people who have incorporated) to exercise speech via advertising, it allows little middle class losers like you and me to come together into groups and combine funds until, as a corporation, we actually have enough money to exercise a little influence on behalf of the little guy (or our particular little collection of little guys). Citizens United is literally the only thing we have going for us right now as a nation that allows regular people to have a shot at a microphone during election cycles. Without it, only rich individuals get to exercise any real influence.

Bottom line, if you're gonna hop on board the new humanist/populist religion, at least do enough research to understand which aspects of society -actually- fit your goofy morals. Don't let the TV hippies install Pavlovian responses to simple terms like corporation into your psyche and then base your political opinions on the resulting knee-jerks, that shit ain't healthy or helpful for anyone involved.

You say all that, but you offer no backing whatsoever. When someone responds to a complete argument with statements that they don't bother qualifying, it's usually because that person is incapable of logical debate or completely unequipped for the topic at hand, but I'm willing to make a leap of faith and ask you to clarify.

What has citizens united done to this country?

What is it about citizens united that is ethically wrong?

Dark money? Please, explain what you mean by dark money.

And don't tell me to go "read history". That's vague as shit and the debate tactic of a 6 year old. "I know the answer, I'm just not gonna tell you." Don't make an assertion and then disguise a flat refusal to qualify it as some sort of moral stance you're taking against my "ignorance". The only thing worse than being a prick is being a juvenile prick.

There is a thing called google
Dark Money - Definition

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

Your understanding is your understanding, That is all.
Citizens United = dark money
Read some history about money involved in any.........campaign.

My understanding of Citizens United is quite clear and quite understandable.
If you have no real conscious about what it has done to this country and its electability on candidates then keep on trucking
It is ethically wrong.

You really don't understand Citizens United, do you, Care? Without it, you can only donate funds to campaigns as an individual, which means that if you, personally, have a shit ton of money, then you, personally, can have influence at election time. If you, personally, are somewhere in that middle class spectrum, then you, personally, don't have enough money to say shit.

When you allow corporations (and pull your head out of your preconceptions for just long enough to get a little daylight on your face and realize that the term corporations doesn't mean "big super rich multinational conglomerates" exclusively. . . it's literally any group of people who have incorporated) to exercise speech via advertising, it allows little middle class losers like you and me to come together into groups and combine funds until, as a corporation, we actually have enough money to exercise a little influence on behalf of the little guy (or our particular little collection of little guys). Citizens United is literally the only thing we have going for us right now as a nation that allows regular people to have a shot at a microphone during election cycles. Without it, only rich individuals get to exercise any real influence.

Bottom line, if you're gonna hop on board the new humanist/populist religion, at least do enough research to understand which aspects of society -actually- fit your goofy morals. Don't let the TV hippies install Pavlovian responses to simple terms like corporation into your psyche and then base your political opinions on the resulting knee-jerks, that shit ain't healthy or helpful for anyone involved.

You say all that, but you offer no backing whatsoever. When someone responds to a complete argument with statements that they don't bother qualifying, it's usually because that person is incapable of logical debate or completely unequipped for the topic at hand, but I'm willing to make a leap of faith and ask you to clarify.

What has citizens united done to this country?

What is it about citizens united that is ethically wrong?

Dark money? Please, explain what you mean by dark money.

And don't tell me to go "read history". That's vague as shit and the debate tactic of a 6 year old. "I know the answer, I'm just not gonna tell you." Don't make an assertion and then disguise a flat refusal to qualify it as some sort of moral stance you're taking against my "ignorance". The only thing worse than being a prick is being a juvenile prick.

Dark money as I understand it is reported out as donated by Americans for Apple Pie, Baseball and Motherhood, or, The Swift Boat Veterans.

Citizens United isn't about donations, it's about buying ad time in favor of a candidate or ballot issue. At any rate, that's a big problem? That people can act under the name of their corporation without making their identity directly public? Are we really so brain-dead as a society that we can't determine for ourselves which arguments on TV are compelling and which aren't if we have to research the legal names of the individuals who are proponents?

If we're worried about foreign influences on our elections, which is valid, why would we throw out a decision that allows groups of middle class local people to weigh in on elections? Citizens United isn't about disclosure, just spending. If you want to change the disclosure laws, rather than throwing out a decision that deals with buying ad time, why not just change the disclosure laws?

 

[g5000]

Soooo, do you think the people with the most money in the world should be the ones who decide for all of us, what is best for us?

Do you think government apparatchiks should?

The idea behind the Koch philosophy is that YOU should be deciding what is best for you, not the government.

 

[peach174]

Your understanding is your understanding, That is all.
Citizens United = dark money
Read some history about money involved in any.........campaign.

My understanding of Citizens United is quite clear and quite understandable.
If you have no real conscious about what it has done to this country and its electability on candidates then keep on trucking
It is ethically wrong.

You say all that, but you offer no backing whatsoever. When someone responds to a complete argument with statements that they don't bother qualifying, it's usually because that person is incapable of logical debate or completely unequipped for the topic at hand, but I'm willing to make a leap of faith and ask you to clarify.

What has citizens united done to this country?

What is it about citizens united that is ethically wrong?

Dark money? Please, explain what you mean by dark money.

And don't tell me to go "read history". That's vague as shit and the debate tactic of a 6 year old. "I know the answer, I'm just not gonna tell you." Don't make an assertion and then disguise a flat refusal to qualify it as some sort of moral stance you're taking against my "ignorance". The only thing worse than being a prick is being a juvenile prick.

Dark money as I understand it is reported out as donated by Americans for Apple Pie, Baseball and Motherhood, or, The Swift Boat Veterans.

Citizens United isn't about donations, it's about buying ad time in favor of a candidate or ballot issue. At any rate, that's a big problem? That people can act under the name of their corporation without making their identity directly public? Are we really so brain-dead as a society that we can't determine for ourselves which arguments on TV are compelling and which aren't if we have to research the legal names of the individuals who are proponents?

If we're worried about foreign influences on our elections, which is valid, why would we throw out a law that allows groups of middle class local people to weigh in on elections? Citizens United isn't about disclosure, just spending. If you want to change the disclosure laws, rather than throwing out a law that deals with buying ad time, why not just change the disclosure laws?

Unions have been doing political ads for more than 40 years so corporations can't?
This is why the Supreme Court said yes they can same as unions.
All of the people of this Nation have the right to voice their political opinions not just the unions.

 

[Nyvin]

The idea behind the Koch philosophy is that THEY should be deciding what is best for you, not the government.

Fix.

As soon as they're not against electric cars and climate change I'll believe your post.