it is unseemly, to say the least, for our chief executive, in his sotu, to attempt to rally the legislative branch vs the judicial on some political battleground
most sub presidential
he's often misleading, good point
i know, obama's one of em
he's often misleading, good point
I didn't say that - you're trying to cover everyone else's ears.
Tough. That's free speech!
Do you think there should be limits on the amount of speech everyone should have? A dollar amount for everyone? Political parties, wealthy individuals, etc?
Speech isn't corruption.
Yes. limits on spending? I have already said so. I think a reasonable limit would be the average earnings of an individual per year. If the S.C. wants to define corporations this way than we should have a flat limit on spending per " person".
political ads are little more than propaganda. They are banned in Britain.
political ads are little more than propaganda. They are banned in Britain.
And as was pointed out to you pages ago, UNIONS SPEND MORE THAN CORPORATIONS.
http://www.debatepolitics.com/break...ng-political-campaigns-17.html#post1058514838
If you're continuing to pretend otherwise, then you're being deliberately disingenuous.
Again, if GE wanted to spend 8.5B on politics, they could have done so already. You keep on pretending that this isn't the case.
They have funds, far beyond that of unions, to pull out the stops over issues/ races they care about.
Do you have any numbers on $$ spent on K street?
So is radio host Mike Savage. The brits have given up their rights because they have been duped by fear mongers. They have closed circuit tv cameras all over the place like big brother.
I'm pretty sure she doesn't know the difference. :dohHow is the amount of money spent on lobbying relevant to the question over which side is having a greater influence on elections? Lobbying is entirely unrelated to the issue we're discussing, except as further proof that campaign spending limits do nothing to curb corporate influence.
Do you believe that what you have to say right here, is not watched? I would say that this is not really the topic at hand but just wondering?...
The only races on which corporations are going to spend money are the few that are relevant to their interests. I have not argued that there are more ways, than one, to corrupt the system. First, you gerrymander the districts so that most are "safe". Then you allow media consolidation so that diversity of speech is limited and then you -the corporation- can narrow the field further, to the very few elections/issues that might be worth influencing. Hey, the proof is easily recognizable in the total abdication the administration & dems have shown towards the special interests in the H.C. legislation.How is the amount of money spent on lobbying relevant to the question over which side is having a greater influence on elections? Lobbying is entirely unrelated to the issue we're discussing, except as further proof that campaign spending limits do nothing to curb corporate influence.
I'm pretty sure she doesn't know the difference. :doh
I don't know he looked good bobo smacking the republicans the other night.
Never have I seen such a magnificent president before except for JFK. I believe his magnificent performance will set a new paradigm when it comes to political debate.
Beneath me? Where did I say that?Just curious? Why do you bother commenting if you think it is beneath you?
oh, sure, he's got STYLE
trouble is no one believes him
he says his health care bill provides "support for states," but every blue governor in the nation is up in arms over the 200B dollars of unbacked mandates in the form of medicaid expansion
he says massachusetts was not aimed at him
he's not an ideologue
he doesn't deal with lobbyists, an insult to america's intelligence, or perhaps we've all forgotten AIG, the SEIU, Phrma...
he's been open
his health care is centrist
his stimulus created 2M jobs
republicans are the ones in danger of losing their seats if they follow him (tell it to dorgan, reid, coakley, corzine, deeds, dodd, lincoln, bayh, nelson, specter, bennett, feingold and more than 50 dogs and freshmen in pelosi's place)
he's being painted as a bolshevik
he hasn't been able to get his word out
republicans have offered no alternatives
yet his latest talking point is, as repeated over and over by axelord and gibbs on the sunday talks, he's embraced republican ideas from the get go, all over the place, in his recovery act which isn't to be called a stimulus anymore, in his health care, in his budget...
meanwhile, his entire agenda is out of reach
yeah, he's AWESOME, dude, hella cool
that's nice
obama's a transparent phony
his entire agenda is dead
Any data on that?.
Sorry, I fail to see how defining the rights delineated in the constitution as meant for people not corporations cedes power to Washington. I would say that it helps to cede power to citizens.
Hmm, I think that many of our elected officials are extremely unhappy with a situation that forces them to spend two days out of every work week raising money rather than doing the people's business. Judging from the Abramoff scandal there are certainly people whose minds are twisted by the flow of money. NOt all, though.
stay tuned and find out
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?