Supreme Court strikes down McCain-Feingold campaign finance law - Page 2 - Great Lakes 4x4. The largest offroad forum in the Midwest

Go Back   Great Lakes 4x4. The largest offroad forum in the Midwest > General 4x4 Stuff > Politics, Government, or Religion Chat
GL4x4 Live! GL4x4 Casino

Politics, Government, or Religion Chat Bring your flamesuit!

greatlakes4x4.com is the premier Great Lakes 4x4 Forum on the internet. Registered Users do not see the above ads.
Search
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old January 27th, 2010, 11:43 AM   #21
3-foot
Senior Member
 
3-foot's Avatar
 
Join Date: 07-21-06
Location: Springfield Township, Mi
Posts: 1,130
iTrader: (1)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PeteC View Post
I have no problem with successful people (individuals) expressing their interests through donations to a political entity. I have no desire to punish successful people.

I just do not see a corporation as having the same rights as individuals.

One may be made up of the other, but they are still not the same.
I would expect no less from you Pete, demonizing corporations is standard practice for anti-capitalist progressives.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Toes View Post
Government has no right to tell anybody corporation or not, how they can spend their money.
Toes is right you are wrong.
3-foot is online now   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old January 27th, 2010, 12:04 PM   #22
pizzaman
Senior Member
 
pizzaman's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-05-05
Location: Independence Twsp, North Oakland County
Posts: 947
iTrader: (3)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Toes View Post
Government has no right to tell anybody corporation or not, how they can spend their money.
X2 end of story!
pizzaman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 27th, 2010, 07:28 PM   #23
Yetti
Buy a Fiat! Save the UAW!
 
Yetti's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-05-05
Location: 20 minutes south of Hell...
Posts: 14,388
iTrader: (10)
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Default

http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/list.php?order=A
__________________
Yetti
Yetti is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 27th, 2010, 10:58 PM   #24
traveller
Senior Member
 
traveller's Avatar
 
Join Date: 02-01-09
Location: williamston mi
Posts: 536
iTrader: (3)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yetti View Post
That is very interesting out of top 15 corporate/special interest donations, 1 is , three neutral, 11 . Guess who the sell outs are.
traveller is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 27th, 2010, 11:10 PM   #25
Tizken
Senior Member
 
Join Date: 07-29-07
Location: Jackson, MI
Posts: 439
iTrader: (7)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

I agree that corporations should be able to do as they please.

But in the past couldn't they donate to what ever group they saw fit that could then lobby as needed? I.E. committee to reelect Nancy Pelosi.... Or anyone else if needed.
Tizken is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 28th, 2010, 04:22 PM   #26
PeteC
Get Up and Go
 
Join Date: 11-05-05
Location: Oak Park, Michigan
Posts: 2,566
iTrader: (3)
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by traveller View Post
Would you hold that same standard to unions, and other politically active groups?. Remember corporations need a voice in Washington to counter unions, environmentally groups, animal rights, ect.. which also spend millions on campaigns. Unless your idea of free speech only effect politically correct speech. If so then you fail to understand the principle of free speech.


Yes, I would hold the unions and oher organizations to the same standards.

Today they have to form PAC's if they want to exert pressure on politicians. These are regulated and there are limits. The Supreme Court ruling eliminates that and allows them to spend without oversight.
PeteC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 28th, 2010, 04:24 PM   #27
PeteC
Get Up and Go
 
Join Date: 11-05-05
Location: Oak Park, Michigan
Posts: 2,566
iTrader: (3)
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 3-foot View Post
I would expect no less from you Pete, demonizing corporations is standard practice for anti-capitalist progressives.




Toes is right you are wrong.
How did I demonize? I simply stated that corporate rights and individual rights are different. How does that make me anti-capitalist?
PeteC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 28th, 2010, 06:50 PM   #28
Mr Toes - R.I.P.
November 7, 1958 - July 22, 2011
 
Mr Toes - R.I.P.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: 07-29-07
Location: Belleville Mi
Posts: 4,727
iTrader: (1)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PeteC View Post
How did I demonize? I simply stated that corporate rights and individual rights are different. How does that make me anti-capitalist?
Actually you didn't say corporate rights and individual rights are different. You said you don't see a corporation as having the same rights as an individual. That would lend us to believe that somehow thats what you believe should be the practice, now weather it's a anti capitalist position is not clear, but given your previous posts it's a safe bet you would like to see corporations some how saddled with socialized government restrictions...
Mr Toes - R.I.P. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 29th, 2010, 08:38 AM   #29
traveller
Senior Member
 
traveller's Avatar
 
Join Date: 02-01-09
Location: williamston mi
Posts: 536
iTrader: (3)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PeteC View Post
Yes, I would hold the unions and oher organizations to the same standards.

Today they have to form PAC's if they want to exert pressure on politicians. These are regulated and there are limits. The Supreme Court ruling eliminates that and allows them to spend without oversight.
So to get this right you are saying that freedom of speech(as to politics) is limited by what the government deems o.k.? Sounds like that will work great for everyone.
traveller is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 29th, 2010, 12:00 PM   #30
3-foot
Senior Member
 
3-foot's Avatar
 
Join Date: 07-21-06
Location: Springfield Township, Mi
Posts: 1,130
iTrader: (1)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PeteC View Post
How did I demonize? I simply stated that corporate rights and individual rights are different. How does that make me anti-capitalist?
The right to free speech is a natural right. It isn't granted to you by the governement. The government has no power to remove it from you for any reason ever.

Your distinction between an individual and a corporation is incorrect. I'll use myself as an example. I have an LLC set up so that I can do side work and legally claim my income. It's only because of the government that I have to be incorporated.

According to you I cannot use my LLC income to donate to a politician if that is my choice but you are wrong. The government has no power to deny my free speech simply because they set up a system where I have to be incorporated to keep from going to jail for tax evasion.

A constitutional law does not change based on your source of income or your level of income.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Toes View Post
Actually you didn't say corporate rights and individual rights are different. You said you don't see a corporation as having the same rights as an individual. That would lend us to believe that somehow thats what you believe should be the practice, now weather it's a anti capitalist position is not clear, but given your previous posts it's a safe bet you would like to see corporations some how saddled with socialized government restrictions...

What he said. I know you are a progressive & anti-capitalistic based on your posting history. This thread simply re-enforces those facts.
3-foot is online now   Reply With Quote
Old January 29th, 2010, 12:22 PM   #31
Mr Toes - R.I.P.
November 7, 1958 - July 22, 2011
 
Mr Toes - R.I.P.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: 07-29-07
Location: Belleville Mi
Posts: 4,727
iTrader: (1)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 3-foot View Post
The right to free speech is a natural right. It isn't granted to you by the governement. The government has no power to remove it from you for any reason ever.

Your distinction between an individual and a corporation is incorrect. I'll use myself as an example. I have an LLC set up so that I can do side work and legally claim my income. It's only because of the government that I have to be incorporated.

According to you I cannot use my LLC income to donate to a politician if that is my choice but you are wrong. The government has no power to deny my free speech simply because they set up a system where I have to be incorporated to keep from going to jail for tax evasion.

A constitutional law does not change based on your source of income or your level of income.




What he said. I know you are a progressive & anti-capitalistic based on your posting history. This thread simply re-enforces those facts.
You're kinda grumpy today...




So give me a





OBAMA SUCKS ASS



That will always make you feel better
Mr Toes - R.I.P. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 29th, 2010, 12:23 PM   #32
Mr Toes - R.I.P.
November 7, 1958 - July 22, 2011
 
Mr Toes - R.I.P.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: 07-29-07
Location: Belleville Mi
Posts: 4,727
iTrader: (1)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 3-foot View Post
The right to free speech is a natural right. It isn't granted to you by the governement. The government has no power to remove it from you for any reason ever.

Your distinction between an individual and a corporation is incorrect. I'll use myself as an example. I have an LLC set up so that I can do side work and legally claim my income. It's only because of the government that I have to be incorporated.

According to you I cannot use my LLC income to donate to a politician if that is my choice but you are wrong. The government has no power to deny my free speech simply because they set up a system where I have to be incorporated to keep from going to jail for tax evasion.

A constitutional law does not change based on your source of income or your level of income.




What he said. I know you are a progressive & anti-capitalistic based on your posting history. This thread simply re-enforces those facts.
Your kinda grumpy today...




So give me a





OBAMA SUCKS ASS



That will always make you feel better
Mr Toes - R.I.P. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 29th, 2010, 01:53 PM   #33
97xj
Senior Member
 
97xj's Avatar
 
Join Date: 03-04-06
Location: Whitmore Lake
Posts: 1,339
iTrader: (2)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 3-foot View Post
The right to free speech is a natural right. It isn't granted to you by the governement. The government has no power to remove it from you for any reason ever.

Your distinction between an individual and a corporation is incorrect. I'll use myself as an example. I have an LLC set up so that I can do side work and legally claim my income. It's only because of the government that I have to be incorporated.

According to you I cannot use my LLC income to donate to a politician if that is my choice but you are wrong. The government has no power to deny my free speech simply because they set up a system where I have to be incorporated to keep from going to jail for tax evasion.

A constitutional law does not change based on your source of income or your level of income.


What he said. I know you are a progressive & anti-capitalistic based on your posting history. This thread simply re-enforces those facts.
I would dis-agree with you.. on corporations having free speech Here is why...

For the record I do agree with you that free speech does not change based on your income level.

You as president/CEO/Employee of your LLC can use the funds to pay employees, buy goods and services as you wish. At that point the funds are no longer the funds of your LLC but the funds of the person or other legal entity that you purchased goods or services from. It would depend on who/what you are dealing with.

As an employee of your LLC you can use your funds to do with as you wish. But I argue that your LLC does not have the right to free speech because it is not a person. You are a person and have the right to free speech at but not your LLC.

The Corporation is a legal entity but not a person. Therefore the free speech does not apply. Only People have the right to completely free speech. But then the Supreme court as accepted some limits on free speech. Hate Speech, Slander etc do have limits already. (that would be a completely different thread)

Now the distinction gets a bit tricky. Can people pool their funds to create a larger groups to fund speech? YES.. We have them as PACs 501c(4) like MoveOn.org, Swift Boat Group, there are a ton of them. Now that they are in this arena they have different laws governing the speech, accounting practices and funding disclosures.


But 501c(4) s are not Corporations.

Corporations are invented by people, run by people but they are not people.
and therefore do have limits on speech.
97xj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 30th, 2010, 07:46 AM   #34
3-foot
Senior Member
 
3-foot's Avatar
 
Join Date: 07-21-06
Location: Springfield Township, Mi
Posts: 1,130
iTrader: (1)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 97xj View Post
I would dis-agree with you.. on corporations having free speech Here is why...

The Corporation is a legal entity but not a person. Therefore the free speech does not apply. Only People have the right to completely free speech.

Corporations are invented by people, run by people but they are not people.
and therefore do have limits on speech.

You are free to disagree with me but you have failed to prove me wrong.

I will make the point again....

The supreme court is bound by the constitution as is the congress. This decision by the supreme court was based on constitutional law, nothing else.

The constitution has only three parties...

1. The federal government
2. The states
3. The people

Only one of these three parties have rights. Those rights are total and unrestricted by the government. So either a corporation has rights or it has none. So which is it?

A) They do have rights.

This would prove that, under the constitution, they are the people which would grant the protection of their unrestricted free speech.

B)They have no rights.

This would prove that they are not the people and do not exist under federal constitutional law. Meaning congress has no power over them at all and cannot create laws restricting them. That power would be left to the states or the people repsectively via the tenth amendment.
3-foot is online now   Reply With Quote
Old January 30th, 2010, 07:53 AM   #35
3-foot
Senior Member
 
3-foot's Avatar
 
Join Date: 07-21-06
Location: Springfield Township, Mi
Posts: 1,130
iTrader: (1)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Toes View Post
Your kinda grumpy today...




So give me a





OBAMA SUCKS ASS



That will always make you feel better
Yeah, I've been working 68-76 hours a week for the last three months. All work and no play makes 3-foot a grumpy boy.

He does suck ass, but I don't need to say it.

His ass sucking is like a giant red blimp flying over the super bowl dropping turds on everyone's head. It's kind of hard to miss.
3-foot is online now   Reply With Quote
Old January 31st, 2010, 10:02 AM   #36
Mr Toes - R.I.P.
November 7, 1958 - July 22, 2011
 
Mr Toes - R.I.P.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: 07-29-07
Location: Belleville Mi
Posts: 4,727
iTrader: (1)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 97xj View Post
I would dis-agree with you.. on corporations having free speech Here is why...

For the record I do agree with you that free speech does not change based on your income level.

You as president/CEO/Employee of your LLC can use the funds to pay employees, buy goods and services as you wish. At that point the funds are no longer the funds of your LLC but the funds of the person or other legal entity that you purchased goods or services from. It would depend on who/what you are dealing with.

As an employee of your LLC you can use your funds to do with as you wish. But I argue that your LLC does not have the right to free speech because it is not a person. You are a person and have the right to free speech at but not your LLC.

The Corporation is a legal entity but not a person. Therefore the free speech does not apply. Only People have the right to completely free speech. But then the Supreme court as accepted some limits on free speech. Hate Speech, Slander etc do have limits already. (that would be a completely different thread)

Now the distinction gets a bit tricky. Can people pool their funds to create a larger groups to fund speech? YES.. We have them as PACs 501c(4) like MoveOn.org, Swift Boat Group, there are a ton of them. Now that they are in this arena they have different laws governing the speech, accounting practices and funding disclosures.


But 501c(4) s are not Corporations.

Corporations are invented by people, run by people but they are not people.
and therefore do have limits on speech.
That was a bunch of nothing (cricket noises)
Mr Toes - R.I.P. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 1st, 2010, 11:15 AM   #37
97xj
Senior Member
 
97xj's Avatar
 
Join Date: 03-04-06
Location: Whitmore Lake
Posts: 1,339
iTrader: (2)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 3-foot View Post
You are free to disagree with me but you have failed to prove me wrong.

I am sorry but this whole thing is an opinion... The Court issued its ruling (opinion) and even the 9 members of the court did not agree because it was 5-4 opinion. You are on the side of the 5.. I am on the side of the 4. The interpretation of the facts differs from the majority to the minority. I will never be able to prove you wrong on this case... It is not like proving that 2+2=4. That would be easy...

Let me ask you these questions?

What of the laws governing alcohol and tobacco outdoor advertising? What of the laws governing pornography? Why can't Playboy put up a 60 foot Centerfold billboard outside an elementary school?

The community I am sure could shame them into not doing it but if Playboy really wanted to 'erect' this billboard what legal means would the community have to stop it? It could be free speech?

Suppose it was one of those new electronic ones that streamed live sex shows?

I am all about completely free speech for the individual... but corporations are not people... Corporations are a legal way for people to have limited liability for the actions they take within the cooperation. Because of this limited liability they should not be granted the same free speech as a flesh and blood person.

Now if people want to pool their resources for political speech we have the PACs that have very different disclosure and funding laws so that we can tell who is funding it. Once we gauge the the speech and who is funding we will have a clear understanding of why they are funding it.

While this is far from perfect it is better than having the Senator from NBNA, The Honorable Senator from AIG, The Esteemed Senator from Bank of America, The Senator from GM, The Senator from China.

Why not name the Congressional Committees the same way we name football stadiums?

Last edited by 97xj; February 1st, 2010 at 11:23 AM.
97xj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 1st, 2010, 11:54 AM   #38
3-foot
Senior Member
 
3-foot's Avatar
 
Join Date: 07-21-06
Location: Springfield Township, Mi
Posts: 1,130
iTrader: (1)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 97xj View Post
I am sorry but this whole thing is an opinion... The Court issued its ruling (opinion) and even the 9 members of the court did not agree because it was 5-4 opinion. You are on the side of the 5.. I am on the side of the 4. The interpretation of the facts differs from the majority to the minority. I will never be able to prove you wrong on this case... It is not like proving that 2+2=4. That would be easy...
You can't prove me wrong because I am right. No need to apologize.

How do you interpret "congress shall make no law..." any differently than did the Supreme Court?


Quote:
Originally Posted by 97xj View Post
Let me ask you these questions?

What of the laws governing alcohol and tobacco outdoor advertising? What of the laws governing pornography? Why can't Playboy put up a 60 foot Centerfold billboard outside an elementary school?
If you are asking can the federal government pass laws against these things, then the answer is no, they cannot constitutionally pass such laws.

These would be powers and issues left to the state or the people, not the federal governemnt. Nice try at a straw man argument, but lets stick to federal law like McCain/Feingold.


Quote:
Originally Posted by 97xj View Post
The community I am sure could shame them into not doing it but if Playboy really wanted to 'erect' this billboard what legal means would the community have to stop it? It could be free speech?
You are still attempting to build the strawman here. Please see the 10th amendment, this would be an issue for the state(or local) government or the people not the federal government.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 97xj View Post
Suppose it was one of those new electronic ones that streamed live sex shows?
This is no different than the above condition.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 97xj View Post
I am all about completely free speech for the individual... but corporations are not people... Corporations are a legal way for people to have limited liability for the actions they take within the cooperation. Because of this limited liability they should not be granted the same free speech as a flesh and blood person.

Now if people want to pool their resources for political speech we have the PACs that have very different disclosure and funding laws so that we can tell who is funding it. Once we gauge the the speech and who is funding we will have a clear understanding of why they are funding it.

While this is far from perfect it is better than having the Senator from NBNA, The Honorable Senator from AIG, The Esteemed Senator from Bank of America, The Senator from GM, The Senator from China.

Why not name the Congressional Committees the same way we name football stadiums?
You are making the same argument as you did before, which I have shown to be incorrect.
3-foot is online now   Reply With Quote
Old February 1st, 2010, 12:44 PM   #39
97xj
Senior Member
 
97xj's Avatar
 
Join Date: 03-04-06
Location: Whitmore Lake
Posts: 1,339
iTrader: (2)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

You have not shown yourself to be correct. Stubborn maybe, but not correct.

It is inconsistent law that the corporation have limited liability and unlimited free speech.

If something is federally protected free speech then the states can not regulate it either. Many state laws have fallen because they encroach on federally protected free speech.

Corporations are not people. Therefore, do not get completely free speech. Especially political speech.

If a group of individuals want to pool their resources for political speech then they should form PACS and not corporations. PACS must disclose the funding and such so there is some level of transparency.
97xj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 2nd, 2010, 11:54 AM   #40
3-foot
Senior Member
 
3-foot's Avatar
 
Join Date: 07-21-06
Location: Springfield Township, Mi
Posts: 1,130
iTrader: (1)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 97xj View Post
You have not shown yourself to be correct. Stubborn maybe, but not correct.
If I am wrong then prove it using the constitution as your proof. You cannot.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 97xj View Post
It is inconsistent law that the corporation have limited liability and unlimited free speech.

If something is federally protected free speech then the states can not regulate it either. Many state laws have fallen because they encroach on federally protected free speech.
I agree, states cannot infringe on your right to free speech.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 97xj View Post
Corporations are not people. Therefore, do not get completely free speech. Especially political speech.
This is the third time you've said this now, but you cannot find anything in the constitution to back up your position. That is why you are wrong.
3-foot is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply
Great Lakes 4x4. The largest offroad forum in the Midwest > General 4x4 Stuff > Politics, Government, or Religion Chat

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:21 PM.


Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright 2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd. Runs best on HiVelocity Hosting.
Page generated in 0.49818 seconds with 80 queries