The convergence of these events means the storm is almost upon us....

[Blackhatjack]

1) SCOTUS appears to be about to take the prohibitions off of corporations in their $$ contributions to political candidates.

2) Corporations are pushing hard to lower or eliminate entirely state taxes on corporate income. See Calif panel proposal. http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/09/11/MNBC19LAUE.DTL&tsp=1

3) A healthcare owned Repub wingnut House Representative calls the President a liar on national television in violation of House Rules. He is dead wrong in his assessment which is clearly proven in the document itself. And Democratic reaction? No sanctions in the House, the MSM gives him a platform to further push his deceitful position, and the Democrats proceed to change the bill itself to accomodate the Repub wingnut. http://www.americablog.com/2009/09/baucus-conrad-cave-again-toughen-health.html (You can imagine the tv ads he will run --after I was brave enough to call the President out on national tv, they had to change the bill. Send me you $$ so I can keep calling out the corrupt Dems!)

ANY DOUBTS AT ALL AS TO WHAT IS COMING?

We did not rein in corporations, and now they are about to use their influence to make sure we never do!

The beginning of the end of Democracy...?

[Deja Q]

1. Well, I'm blind. Tell us more and what we can do for you.

[atreides1]

2. There is an upside

If this convergence does happen, those whack jobs on the right who love their "freedoms" will be right in the shit with the rest of us.

[Toucano]

3. Little comfort, that. n-t

[Blackhatjack]

6. That's the way it always turns out for those who are 'used' to act against their interests...

I am always amazed at those who identify with a Republican Party that actively works against their interests.

The Bush tax cuts were a prime example. People barely making it financially thinking they should ensure the economic prosperity of the the richest 1%.

[bvar22]

26. Don't "The Great Wall Street Bailouts",

"forgetting" about re-regulating Wall Street after the Bailouts,

The coming Trillion Dollar Gift to the Health Insurance Industry,

the INCREASE in defense spending,

the recent $140 Billion additional spending for Iraq Afghanistan

MORE "Free Trade and INCREASES in H1B Visas,

The dropping of EFCA without even a token fight.....

Don't these things ever make you wonder if YOU are voting against your own Economic Interests ?

[merh]

Why do you think that SCOTUS is about to "take the prohibitions off of corporations"?

I mean, I know about the matter before SCOTUS. What leads you to believe they will rule in favor of the corporations?

[robinlynne]

5. I can answer that one. 5 rightwing judges, 4 liberals, plus the fact that they could have simply

ruled on the matter at hand. would have been a simple no. But they chose to question all precedent....

[merh]

7. Do you have a link to the oral agrument - is there a transcript?

From what I have read it will be the 4 conservatives against the other 5 justices.

[Blackhatjack]

10. By the tenor of oral arguments and questions the Justices asked at the SCOTUS...

.... it is pretty clear that the majority shift that occurred with added CJ Roberts and J Alito will likely bring us a 5-4 decision in favor of overturning the ban on corporations giving $$ directly to political campaigns on a 1st Amendment ground.

This re-arguing of the case to specifically address a case that was not pertinent to reaching a conclusion strongly indicates a desire to overturn an existing precedent.

[robinlynne]

14. exactly.

[bvar22]

27. By the way, you can thank the DLC/Blue Dogs...

..for the seating of Alito and Roberts.

SEE: Gang of 14.

[robinlynne]

13. You should be able to find it on CSPAN.

[truedelphi]

17. Merh, the entire (Audio) debate by SCOTUS should be found somewhere on

C-Span's webstire. It was broadcast on Wednesday or early Thursday AM.

It is worth the time to listen to it.

[merh]

24. Thank you

To be honest, I was sorta playing with the others. They know what the argument was but they cannot tell me what is public record at the SCOTUS site. I find that interesting. The transcript and recording can be found at SCOTUS' website.

[MrsCorleone]

28. Links inside:

Audio of CU v. FEC:

http://www.c-span.org/Watch/Media/2009/09/09/HP/R/22917/CSPAN+Presents+a+Special+Session+on+Campaign+Finance+Case.aspx


Transcript:

http://www.supremecourtus.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/08-205%5BReargued%5D.pdf

[robinlynne]

4. why do you say "Dems proceed to change the bill". What are you talking about?

[Blackhatjack]

8. From the link above....

From TIME:

"The controversy over Republican Rep. Joe Wilson's shouting out "You Lie!" at the President over his claim that illegal immigrants wouldn't benefit from health-care reform apparently sparked some reconsideration of the relevant language. "We really thought we'd resolved this question of people who are here illegally, but as we reflected on the President's speech last night we wanted to go back and drill down again," said Senator Kent Conrad, one of the Democrats in the talks after a meeting Thursday morning. Baucus later that afternoon said the group would put in a proof of citizenship requirement to participate in the new health exchange — a move likely to inflame the left."

[robinlynne]

15. ahh. Baucus. but he is not a Democrat...... Thanks, hadn't read that.

[MNDemNY]

21. As much as Obama is.

[robinlynne]

25. I'm going to disagree with you on this one, but it is too long of an argument to

have in a few threads. I'm not happy with Obama's half republican cabinet, and corporate sponsors at all, but I'll take Obama over Baucus any day....

[nadinbrzezinski]

9. It's been dead for a while

it officially died on December 12, 2000

US Democracy RIP

1789-2000

[lunatica]

11. I tend to agree

Anyone who thinks that after the Supreme Justices selected Bush we can just ignore it and pretend to still be a Constitutional Nation based on the Rule of Law is deluded. Most Americans appear to be deluded. It's like raping someone and leaving her pregnant so her life changes completely then telling her to pretend you didn't break the law and that it didn't happen, or that it's OK, just accept it and move on.

Only if the crime against the Constitution is addressed and punished can you say we're still a Constitutional Democracy. Period. I don't know what we are but we haven't been a Constitutional Democracy for even one second since that day.

[nadinbrzezinski]

16. I will tell you what we are, since it fits the classic definition

we are a fascist state.

And fascist states do engage in elections and not necessarily in the full power of the state.

People think Germany when one says fascist, but there are many other models. this is a uniquely American model, but fascist nonetheless... why the fiction is still maintained? It is needed.

[Speck Tater]

12. We must be freed from the illusion of freedom and liberated from the belief that we have liberty. nt

[pansypoo53219]

18. teevee gnews is only helping this.

of corporations, by corporations, FOR corporations.

[jfkraus]

19. Our dem leaders should take violin lessons soon!

[MNDemNY]

20. This will continue until we stop electing corporatists to office.

[Individualist]

22. almost?

Government of, by and for the corporations has been in effect since the Reagan administration.

[Blackhatjack]

23. J Scalia's comment that there was no difference between a corp and a person is scary...

A corporation is a legal fiction, it has no morals, no patriotism, no empathy for people, etc.

To equate a corporation with a person is the equivalent of saying a robot and a person are alike.

And this will lead us down a very dangerous road if they are treated the same, because people with an agenda do direct the actions of corporations --and those people can use the assets of a corporation to subvert the political processes in this country.