• Re: Citizens United rulin

    From WAYNE CHIRNSIDE@1:123/140 to EARL CROASMUN on Sat May 1 09:55:00 2010
    EARL CROASMUN wrote to WAYNE CHIRNSIDE <=-

    Disagree with the Citizens United ruling handed down by the Supreme court allowing unlimited political campaign donations by corporations
    subverting your rights as a U.S. citizen?

    The first amendment to the United States Constitution agrees with the decision in Citizens United. You posted a site for those who do not
    like free speech. How about one for those who DO like free speech?


    How many votes do you think a large corporation like Exxon - Mobil
    is entitled to?

    If they've a greater right than that of an average citizen to donate
    to a political candidate, and they do, the that's elevating corporations
    far above those rights granted to U.S. citizens.

    Thus corporations can thus easily move the U.S. towards the very definition
    of a fascist state as defined by Benito Mussolini.

    Your average U.S. citizen is strictly limited in what they can donate,
    the corporations are NOT.

    Thus we still have a Representative government only now it
    represents corporate interests over that of the American people.

    ... MultiMail, the new multi-platform, multi-format offline reader!
    --- MultiMail/Linux v0.49
    * Origin: Doc's Place BBS Fido Since 1991 docsplace.tzo.com (1:123/140)
  • From Earl Croasmun@1:124/311 to Wayne Chirnside on Sat May 1 12:04:52 2010
    The first amendment to the United States Constitution agrees with the decision in Citizens United. You posted a site for those who do not like free speech. How about one for those who DO like free speech?

    How many votes do you think a large corporation like Exxon - Mobil
    is entitled to?

    Corporations don't vote in elections for governmental office. Most people already knew that, but I point it out just in case.

    If they've a greater right than that of an average citizen to donate
    to a political candidate, and they do, the that's elevating corporations
    far above those rights granted to U.S. citizens.

    The case had nothing to do with donating money to a candidate, and it gave
    no "greater" rights to corporations than individuals. Your lack of understanding the basics of the case helps to explain your opinion of it.

    Thus corporations can thus easily move the U.S. towards the very definition of a fascist state as defined by Benito Mussolini.

    Ha ha ha! Sauer and Klahn tried that a while back, and then dropped it
    after they displayed that they don't have a clue as to what "fascist"
    means. Go ahead and take your turn. Try to explain why Citizens United
    can lead to a centralized government having more power OVER privately-held companies!

    Your average U.S. citizen is strictly limited in what they can donate,
    the corporations are NOT.

    Really? The United States Supreme Court and the US Code disagree with you,
    but please, please elaborate!!!


    --- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5a
    * Origin: FidoTel & QWK on the Web! www.fidotel.com (1:124/311)
  • From WAYNE CHIRNSIDE@1:123/140 to EARL CROASMUN on Sat May 1 16:28:00 2010
    EARL CROASMUN wrote to WAYNE CHIRNSIDE <=-

    The first amendment to the United States Constitution agrees with the decision in Citizens United. You posted a site for those who do not like free speech. How about one for those who DO like free speech?

    How many votes do you think a large corporation like Exxon - Mobil
    is entitled to?

    Corporations don't vote in elections for governmental office. Most
    people already knew that, but I point it out just in case.

    If they've a greater right than that of an average citizen to donate
    to a political candidate, and they do, the that's elevating corporations far above those rights granted to U.S. citizens.

    The case had nothing to do with donating money to a candidate, and it
    gave no "greater" rights to corporations than individuals. Your lack
    of understanding the basics of the case helps to explain your opinion
    of it.

    Thus corporations can thus easily move the U.S. towards the very definition of a fascist state as defined by Benito Mussolini.

    Ha ha ha! Sauer and Klahn tried that a while back, and then dropped it after they displayed that they don't have a clue as to what "fascist" means. Go ahead and take your turn. Try to explain why Citizens
    United can lead to a centralized government having more power OVER privately-held companies!

    Your average U.S. citizen is strictly limited in what they can donate,
    the corporations are NOT.

    Really? The United States Supreme Court and the US Code disagree with you, but please, please elaborate!!!

    So snap out that checkbook and write a matching donation equal to Exxon - Mobil's
    donation.

    Be a true American and DO IT TODAY!!!


    ... MultiMail, the new multi-platform, multi-format offline reader!
    --- MultiMail/Linux v0.49
    * Origin: Doc's Place BBS Fido Since 1991 docsplace.tzo.com (1:123/140)
  • From Ed Hulett@1:123/789 to WAYNE CHIRNSIDE on Sat May 1 17:23:51 2010
    On 05/01/2010 01:28 PM, WAYNE CHIRNSIDE -> EARL CROASMUN wrote:
    EARL CROASMUN wrote to WAYNE CHIRNSIDE <=-

    The first amendment to the United States Constitution agrees with
    the
    decision in Citizens United. You posted a site for those who do not
    like free speech. How about one for those who DO like free speech?

    How many votes do you think a large corporation like Exxon - Mobil
    is entitled to?

    Corporations don't vote in elections for governmental office. Most
    people already knew that, but I point it out just in case.

    If they've a greater right than that of an average citizen to donate
    to a political candidate, and they do, the that's elevating corporations
    far above those rights granted to U.S. citizens.

    The case had nothing to do with donating money to a candidate, and it
    gave no "greater" rights to corporations than individuals. Your lack
    of understanding the basics of the case helps to explain your opinion
    of it.

    Thus corporations can thus easily move the U.S. towards the very
    definition
    of a fascist state as defined by Benito Mussolini.

    Ha ha ha! Sauer and Klahn tried that a while back, and then dropped it
    after they displayed that they don't have a clue as to what "fascist"
    means. Go ahead and take your turn. Try to explain why Citizens
    United can lead to a centralized government having more power OVER
    privately-held companies!

    Your average U.S. citizen is strictly limited in what they can donate,
    the corporations are NOT.

    Really? The United States Supreme Court and the US Code disagree with
    you, but please, please elaborate!!!

    So snap out that checkbook and write a matching donation equal to Exxon - Mobil's
    donation.

    The case did NOT address direct donations to individual candidates.

    Be a true American and DO IT TODAY!!!

    Please educate yourself on the case. It was about paid advertisement supporting
    or opposing a candidate. Citizens United made a short documentary about Hillary
    Clinton and were barred from showing it. They sued. It went all the way to the Supreme Court and the SC found in CU's favor.

    IF you get your information from only left-wing sources, you will continue to embarrass yourself.

    Ed

    --
    "For it is a truth, which the experience of all ages has attested, that the people
    are commonly most in danger when the means of injuring their rights are in the possession of those [toward] whom they entertain the least suspicion." --Alexander Hamilton

    Blogs: http://edsramblings.wordpress.com | http://woodcaringnsuch.wordpress.com http://edsscrollsawbits.blogspot.com

    Facebook: http://wwwfacebook.com/ed.hulett | Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/yaesu

    Linux User #416016
    Linux Machine #385030

    --- Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.1.9pre) Gecko/20100217 Light
    * Origin: Fidonet Via Newsreader - http://www.easternstar.info (1:123/789.0)
  • From WAYNE CHIRNSIDE@1:123/140 to ED HULETT on Sat May 1 18:09:28 2010
    Test deleted unread.

    Roll over
    --- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
    * Origin: Doc's Place BBS Fido Since 1991 docsplace.tzo.com (1:123/140)
  • From Ed Hulett@1:123/789 to WAYNE CHIRNSIDE on Sat May 1 19:21:56 2010
    On 05/01/2010 03:09 PM, WAYNE CHIRNSIDE -> ED HULETT wrote:
    Test deleted unread.

    Roll over

    Way to run away from the truth, idiot.

    Ed

    --
    "For it is a truth, which the experience of all ages has attested, that the people
    are commonly most in danger when the means of injuring their rights are in the possession of those [toward] whom they entertain the least suspicion." --Alexander Hamilton

    Blogs: http://edsramblings.wordpress.com | http://woodcaringnsuch.wordpress.com http://edsscrollsawbits.blogspot.com

    Facebook: http://wwwfacebook.com/ed.hulett | Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/yaesu

    Linux User #416016
    Linux Machine #385030

    --- Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.1.9pre) Gecko/20100217 Light
    * Origin: Fidonet Via Newsreader - http://www.easternstar.info (1:123/789.0)
  • From Earl Croasmun@1:124/311 to Wayne Chirnside on Sat May 1 21:09:06 2010
    How many votes do you think a large corporation like Exxon - Mobil
    is entitled to?

    Corporations don't vote in elections for governmental office. Most people already knew that, but I point it out just in case.

    Wayne's response? None.

    If they've a greater right than that of an average citizen to donate
    to a political candidate, and they do, the that's elevating corporations far above those rights granted to U.S. citizens.

    The case had nothing to do with donating money to a candidate, and it gave no "greater" rights to corporations than individuals. Your lack of understanding the basics of the case helps to explain your opinion of it.

    Wayne's response? None.

    Thus corporations can thus easily move the U.S. towards the very
    definition
    of a fascist state as defined by Benito Mussolini.

    Ha ha ha! Sauer and Klahn tried that a while back, and then dropped it after they displayed that they don't have a clue as to what "fascist" means. Go ahead and take your turn. Try to explain why Citizens United can lead to a centralized government having more power OVER privately-held companies!

    Wayne's response? None.

    Your average U.S. citizen is strictly limited in what they can donate, the corporations are NOT.

    Really? The United States Supreme Court and the US Code disagree
    with you, but please, please elaborate!!!

    So snap out that checkbook and write a matching donation equal to Exxon - Mobil's donation.

    THAT is what you selected to respond to? Easy. The largest check they can legally write to a candidate is for zero dollars. Anyone can match or
    exceed that amount.

    --- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5a
    * Origin: FidoTel & QWK on the Web! www.fidotel.com (1:124/311)
  • From WAYNE CHIRNSIDE@1:123/140 to ED HULETT on Sun May 2 01:27:00 2010
    ED HULETT wrote to WAYNE CHIRNSIDE <=-

    On 05/01/2010 03:09 PM, WAYNE CHIRNSIDE -> ED HULETT wrote:
    Test deleted unread.

    Roll over

    Way to run away from the truth, idiot.

    Roll over.

    ... MultiMail, the new multi-platform, multi-format offline reader!
    --- MultiMail/Linux v0.49
    * Origin: Doc's Place BBS Fido Since 1991 docsplace.tzo.com (1:123/140)
  • From Bob Klahn@1:124/311 to Earl Croasmun on Sat May 8 21:41:00 2010

    ...

    The first amendment to the United States Constitution agrees with the ~>> EC> decision in Citizens United. You posted a site for those who do not ~>> EC> like free speech. How about one for those who DO like free speech?

    How many votes do you think a large corporation like Exxon - Mobil
    is entitled to?

    Corporations don't vote in elections for governmental
    office. Most people already knew that, but I point it out
    just in case.

    Then corporations are not people. So they don't have
    constitutional rights. Your first line above is false.

    ...

    Thus corporations can thus easily move the U.S. towards the very definition ~>> of a fascist state as defined by Benito Mussolini.

    Ha ha ha! Sauer and Klahn tried that a while back, and
    then dropped it after they displayed that they don't have a
    clue as to what "fascist" means. Go ahead and take your

    Oh, I do have a very good clue. However, when did I say
    corporations could move the US toward a fascist state because of
    Citizens United?

    Oh, they probably could, but that wasn't the question.

    turn. Try to explain why Citizens United can lead to a
    centralized government having more power OVER
    privately-held companies!

    Read up on the market. Business friendly often does not mean
    market friendly, but friendly to existing businesses.



    BOB KLAHN bob.klahn@sev.org http://home.toltbbs.com/bobklahn

    ... I lost it about 3 sky bound bit buckets ago.
    * Silver Xpress V4.5/P [Reg]
    --- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5a
    * Origin: FidoTel & QWK on the Web! www.fidotel.com (1:124/311)
  • From Bob Klahn@1:124/311 to Ed Hulett on Sat May 8 21:41:00 2010

    ...

    Be a true American and DO IT TODAY!!!

    Please educate yourself on the case. It was about paid
    advertisement supporting or opposing a candidate. Citizens
    United made a short documentary about Hillary Clinton and
    were barred from showing it. They sued. It went all the way
    to the Supreme Court and the SC found in CU's favor.

    And they were wrong.



    BOB KLAHN bob.klahn@sev.org http://home.toltbbs.com/bobklahn

    ... I am Ginsu of Borg. You will be assimilated, but WAIT! There's MORE!
    * Silver Xpress V4.5/P [Reg]
    --- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5a
    * Origin: FidoTel & QWK on the Web! www.fidotel.com (1:124/311)