Today's Supreme Court Decision

[( . Y . ) Grace Kelly]

The fact is no matter what country you live in there will always be reasons to gripe about the way its run, the older I get the more things I find to gripe about probably becuase I've seen the same old crap over and over, smiling politicians kissing babies , promises of a better future for all, you have all heard and seen that sort of crap before, it's like listening to the same old story repeated over and over; quite intriging and interesting at first but bloody annoying after the umpteenth time.
I think Liz is right when he said it could be worse we could be Haitian (or French)

[( . Y . )Mitzi Gaynor]

Originally Posted by ( . Y . ) Grace Kelly

I think Liz is right when he said it could be worse we could be Haitian (or French)

Or Canadian.

/shudder

[( . Y . )Bettie Page]

And that is exactly what we need to protect. The freedom and ability to gripe. publicaly, privately, in the press, in the voting booth, and however we damn well please.

As soon as we accept that the government has the ability to put any limits on that freedom, then we might as well say goodby to it completely.

Also, if we ourselves accept the notion that "evil rich corporations" have an unfair advantage, or if we use straw dog arguments about rich versus poor, we are in effect asking the government to take away the rights of a group that we feel threatened by.

Pretty soon it becomes illegal to even talk about cetain subjects such as in Germany where scholars are put in jail for writing history books, people in America are deemed non persons and placed into jails without formal charges, legal represnetation, or access to basic jurisprudence. If you do a little research on the erosions f freedom of expression and association in Canada, Australia, The EU, and other places worldwide, a scary trend isdeveloping that ony approved thought will be tolerated, and only approved speakers are allowed to do so.

Anyone that declares that another group should be denied any rights for whatever reason should also then be willing to accept the loss of rights without complaint if ever a different group gains power and decides that YOU should be silenced.

[( . Y . )Elizabeth Taylor]

Some of you can wait forever for your perfect government. Some of you are just paranoid. I just want things to improve now a little on the march towards better government and this ruling does not improve the way things work. By the way, I don't think all corporations are evil, nor do I think rich people are evil. However, I guess it needs to be repeated: large corporations are not considered human beings for a good reason: they are controlled by a few and in no way resemble any kind of "representative" view. While incorporation may be a good form for a business, a corporation is a poor excuse for a "group", and those of you who are fine with this ruling are just wrong.

Definition: The most common form of business organization, and one which is chartered by a state and given many legal rights as an entity separate from its owners. This form of business is characterized by the limited liability of its owners, the issuance of shares of easily transferable stock, and existence as a going concern. The process of becoming a corporation, call incorporation, gives the company separate legal standing from its owners and protects those owners from being personally liable in the event that the company is sued (a condition known as limited liability).

[( . Y . ) Grace Kelly]

we has a freedom of expression problem here in the UK recently..

check this out

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle6973792.ece

[( . Y . )Bettie Page]

Originally Posted by ( . Y . ) Grace Kelly

we has a freedom of expression problem here in the UK recently..

check this out

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle6973792.ece

That's pretty much a case of "been there, done that" for us here. Google the Nazi march in Skokie, IL. And yes, I agree that they should have been allowed to march. Of course once they stop being on their best behaviour the rules change. But that also applies to any opposition demonstrators. Equal protection, also should translate into equal enforcement.

And for Carmen. While the discussion here has been on the right of free speech for corporations (i.e. the SCOTUS ruling), I will agree tha under certain articles and statutes that corporations do have certain immunities and protections that shouldn't exist, as well as tax loopholes. But these are a matter of statute and law and not one of rights. The former should never infringe upon the latter for any entity. Individual, corporation, or other. And the two should never be treated as interchangable.

Be careful of how the MSM and political entities frame the argument for their own ends. Sometimes the best way to get to the correct answer isn't to discuss the answer, but to argue the question.

[( . Y . )Mitzi Gaynor]

Originally Posted by ( . Y . )Bettie Page

And for Carmen...

I think you mean "Liz."

[( . Y . )Bettie Page]

Originally Posted by ( . Y . )Mitzi Gaynor

I think you mean "Liz."

Yes. Posting sans coffee.

[Carmen Miranda]

US Citizens have the freedom to gripe, march, spend money on ads by the **** load.

Too bad corporations are not people. Not "real people", not "natural people", but "artificial persons" - so you can sue them, collect taxes, etc.

This wouldn't matter if we were talking about citizens compared to widgets. Because widgets are not multi-billion dollar corporations that, by extension, can buy off anything they feel like. Suddenly my tiny voice calling in to NPR seems even tiny-er. BECAUSE I CAN'T TAKE OUT ADS DURING THE FUKCING SUPER BOWL to push my agenda. (I know, I'm just a lazy liberal who COULD buy an ad during the super bowl if only I applied myself and stopped asking for handouts. **** wait - I am not sure, am I legally allowed to refer to it as a Super Bowl according to NFL properties, or must I call it the Big Game?)

But because we ARE talking about corporations now being granted the same rights as you and me, except they can't vote, can't worship, can't be drafted.

Where are the so-called conservatives on this? No citizen shall have any greater say than any other citizen. A homeless man in theory and in law has just as much influence over an election as me. Corporations are not citizens - that's the only argument that need be said.

[( . Y . )Elizabeth Taylor]

Well put.