Political Roundtable Quasar of Mayhem part III

[pancakes3]

has anyone seen any loose eyeballs? they seem to have rolled completely out of my sockets.

[montestewart]

The repeated generalized labeling of entire generations is denigrating to individual existence.

I protested the invasions not only of Iraq but of Afghanistan. I saw plenty of people my age there, along with their children and grandchildren. I haven't personally known many people that would fit the superficial stereotype of the "Me Generation," but I imagine there are similar types in subsequent generations. Focus a little more on the actual actions of individuals, and a little less on Time Magazine profiles.

By some measures, Obama is a baby boomer. By some measures, Palin is not. This is all too complicated.

[hands11]

If you believe Corporations are not people and they should not be able to buy our politicians with undisclosed and unlimited amounts of money so politicians will answer exclusively to them and not the people who elected them, then you should get behind this movement and sign this petition.

This is an issue that most everyone should be able to support if they believe in American the way the founders designed it.

It will take a while to get this through but Rome wasn't built in a day. You have to start at some point.

For me, our political reconstruction boils down to two issues.

Citizens Unity needs reversed.
The Senate Filibuster need suspended and reworked. It has been so abused lately that we long longer have a majority government. If nothing is done, that is not going to change. This is the biggest reason the congress is broken right now.

http://sanders.senate.gov/petition/?uid ... 2c39342c6c

Constitutional amendment that would overturn the Supreme Court decision in a case called Citizens United vs. FEC.

The Saving American Democracy Amendment states that:

Corporations are not persons with constitutional rights equal to real people.
Corporations are subject to regulation by the people.
Corporations may not make campaign contributions.
Congress and states have the power to regulate campaign finances.

[dobrojim]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ppOpOv_kv2s&sns=fb

Love this vid

rick perry is a sad person

[popper]

If you believe Corporations are not people and they should not be able to buy our politicians with undisclosed and unlimited amounts of money so politicians will answer exclusively to them and not the people who elected them, then you should get behind this movement and sign this petition.

This is an issue that most everyone should be able to support if they believe in American the way the founders designed it.

It will take a while to get this through but Rome wasn't built in a day. You have to start at some point.

For me, our political reconstruction boils down to two issues.

Citizens Unity needs reversed.
The Senate Filibuster need suspended and reworked. It has been so abused lately that we long longer have a majority government. If nothing is done, that is not going to change. This is the biggest reason the congress is broken right now.

http://sanders.senate.gov/petition/?uid ... 2c39342c6c

Constitutional amendment that would overturn the Supreme Court decision in a case called Citizens United vs. FEC.

The Saving American Democracy Amendment states that:

Corporations are not persons with constitutional rights equal to real people.
Corporations are subject to regulation by the people.
Corporations may not make campaign contributions.
Congress and states have the power to regulate campaign finances.

Hands - How come you never include union and trial lawyer contributions in your quest to rid the political system of dirty money? After all, they are two of the largest influencers in the electoral system. Also, why don't you question why Pres. Obama is such a powerful vacuum for Wall Street contributions - he's the league MVP in that regard.

[hands11]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ppOpOv_kv2s&sns=fb

Love this vid

rick perry is a sad person

Now wasn't that just adorable. Now that is grace in action.

These two young ladies really get it. They not only understand the real message of Jesus but they understand what their country is about and what crappy politics is.


Good for them to take the time to make a video like that.

Thanks for sharing that.

[hands11]

Unlimited undisclosed money is one issue. That includes everyone. Trial lawyer and unions. Citizens united will destroy this country if it is not reversed.

Corporation not being treated as people is an issue on it's own. Corporation are not people. people are people. Everyone knows that.

Rules regarding lobbyist is a whole different issue that needs addressed. I didn't even get into that one.

Another would be the ability of such third parties to run ads on behalf of a candidate. I say no.
Now if a group want to endorse a candidate after they take an internal vote on it of their members, thats fine. Tell the campaign and let them announce it. Hell you can even announce it yourself but you shouldn't be able to run ads were the message is only one sided and there is no one with a mic to ask you questions.

The goal is for an open process that represent as many people as possible. The inverse of that is what we are getting. The top 1% can drown out everyone else with their money and now they don't even have to disclose it. Specially since they have more and more of it.

As for what makes unions different then corporations. Is that what you are asking me ?

[popper]

Unlimited undisclosed money is one issue. That includes everyone. Trial lawyer and unions. Citizens united will destroy this country if it is not reversed.

Corporation not being treated as people is an issue on it's own. Corporation are not people. people are people. Everyone knows that.

Rules regarding lobbyist is a whole different issue that needs addressed. I didn't even get into that one.

Another would be the ability of such third parties to run ads on behalf of a candidate. I say no.
Now if a group want to endorse a candidate after they take an internal vote on it of their members, thats fine. Tell the campaign and let them announce it. Hell you can even announce it yourself but you shouldn't be able to run ads were the message is only one sided and there is no one with a mic to ask you questions.

The goal is for an open process that represent as many people as possible. The inverse of that is what we are getting. The top 1% can drown out everyone else with their money and now they don't even have to disclose it. Specially since they have more and more of it.

As for what makes unions different then corporations. Is that what you are asking me ?

Yes that is what I am asking. Unions are not people either. They pour massive amounts of campaign cash into the political system and don't even pretend to poll their members. I would support prohibiting direct contributions from Corporations and Unions but I doubt the Dems would go for it.

[hands11]

Personally I am open to looking at all of it to create a better system. That said. Unions are very different then corporations.

Unions are organization that are formed to give individual workers/groups of individual workers more leverage against corporations that are run by owners or boards of directors or in the case of government unions, politicians. Unions represent the people. That is why they were created in the first place. I am not trying to be obtuse by saying this but if you haven't, read up on the history of corporations, labor laws and the formation of unions. If you already have, maybe read some more.

Unions elect their leaders. Corporation are either privately owned in which one or a handful of people have the power/money vote and no one is elected or they have boards in which the stock owner ( largest stock owners having the largest voices ) put the board in place. They are not representative of the workers. That is in large part why unions got started. in the first place. Corporate contribution have nothing to do with representing the majority of it's workers. There is far less if any correlation between corporate donation as they represent their employees then unions and how they represent their members. It is not even a goal of corporation to care what their employees think. Corporations are not people. Those people running them should have to use their own money and do it under a better set of individual contribution laws. So if you don' like union contributions, your hair should be on fire about corporate contribution.

That said, none of these organization should be allowed to contribute unlimited undisclosed funds. Individual people, nor corporations, nor unions.

Unions advocate on behalf of the workers which are large groups of people. There is a reason the majority of union members vote for Dems year after year. It is because the Dems stand for the working people more then the Republicans do. I'm not talking about the Union contributions. I'm talking about how they vote individually. A majority vote for Dems year after year. And as I said, they vote for their union leaders. Due to this, I will take a wild stab and say, union primarily advocate for issue that support the majority of their union members. If not, they would get voted out of leadership. I think that is a well know fact.

Since Republicans do not win the majority of the individual votes of the union members, they do not get the contributions from the unions who represent the majority of the members. This is why Republicans have set their sights and breaking up the unions. They could have just as easily supported issues that the members felt supported their views. They have not done that.

Does that mean I think think the union process is perfect. No I would like the see unions leaders lobby/eduction their members. They should also listen and learn and share that information. Union members political contributions should be collected voluntarily based to disclosed position that are contextual to the unions interests. If the member agree with the union position they should donate or contribute individually if they want. If not, that person can contribute individually directly to the campaign of their choice.

Does that help clarify the issue and my position on it ? I think I did and accurate job and I am being far minded about it.

So under no condition should corporations be allowed to contribute. They are not people, they do not represent their workers, and they are not elected to do such.

No one should be allowed to contribute undisclosed amounts.

And the union contribution process, which does represent the majority of it's workers should be tweaked.

Of these three issues, the first two are much bigger problems then the last. That's probably why I don't bring it up. Unions do represent the majority of their workers and the majority do vote for Dems. But it can be improved.

[DCZards]

Union members political contributions should be collected voluntarily based to disclosed position that are contextual to the unions interests. If the member agree with the union position they should donate or contribute individually if they want. If not, that person can contribute individually directly to the campaign of their choice.

Actually, the political contributions made by union members ARE voluntary. Unions cannot use dues money to support political campaigns or political parties....only the money that members voluntarily give to the union's political action fund can be used for those purposes. There are laws against unions using dues money for political purposes...and unions have to go to great lengths (and deal with considerable federal oversight) to prove the they are using voluntary contributions--and not dues money--for political campaigns.

[dobrojim]

it is my fervent hope that the defining issue in 2012 for every candidate
for national and state office to be whether they would support a constitutional
amendment to ban corporate personhood.

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

Just saw this Dylan Ratigan rant from August. Great stuff and gets at why I'm a registered independent. The system -- this two party system -- is broken.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G4yDCUJJm_U&feature=youtube_gdata_player[/youtube]

I would vote for this guy along with Ron Paul.

[hands11]

Just saw this Dylan Ratigan rant from August. Great stuff and gets at why I'm a registered independent. The system -- this two party system -- is broken.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G4yDCUJJm_U&feature=youtube_gdata_player[/youtube]

I would vote for this guy along with Ron Paul.

Yeep see page 94 fishercob posted it

That video kind of had something to do with the last pages.

[pancakes3]

Dobro posted a different video, but the message is the same. Despite hiding behind political ideologies - issues like welfare and abortion - things that will not be resolved, the two political parties are essentially one.

However, you can really see the difference in print vs video and academia vs "journalism" in the differences between the two videos. Also, i completely disagree that the president holds the most power in the free world and can just make a sweeping statement to the american public and initiate change. You want change, you need congress to get in line. The prez absolutely cannot do it outside of the system.

An effective president is a result of change, not because.

[hands11]

My bad, fishercob posted it.

you said, "An effective president is a result of change, not because."

An interesting statement for sure. I would say taking one side or the other on a statement like this would leave one on the wrong side of it. Both side of it are true.

It does take a curtain level of the public/culture perspective to be at a curtain level first. That is the core spark of a transition. It also takes leaders to sound the rallying cry to the masses. That help coordinate the voice more quickly and it starts the political process regarding the issue. Then over time it help bring along the herd ( you have to bring along the herd). Kind of like Occupy Wall Street was a spark that ignited the dry wood of the pent up public anger over the rigged game. The wood had been accumulating for years but needed a stark to get the movement started. Now the fire is big enough that the herd can see it and many are walking toward the bright light.

Since we have a political process, Congress is involved and they need to see the poles support and idea. In the case like we have now where the opposition party doesn't want to listen to the polls/the public, then a president has to put the heat on them by taking it to the people.

So besides being commander and chief, I think one of the Presidents most powerful powers is the power to be a cheer leader. It is us who have to get the things done at the end of the day, be it pressuring our congressional person, volunteering out time, starting a business, etc. The President can have a huge effect by motivational and educational speeches. Kind of Team USA's Head Coach.
He can help focus the efforts.

Another that is simply waiting for a spark is the legalization of weed. Every year that passes, the old timers who were against it get older and die off and they are replaced by people that don't have a reefer madness perspective on it. They see weed as no worst then alcohol. One day the prohibition will end.

[hands11]

Interesting news day.

The Iraq War has ended.
It was interesting watching the news of the Iraq war ending. Wow, after 9 years it is finally over. A 9 year war fought by a very slim slither of America so it being over is not really something the country will feel collectively. Its was just news. But it is nice to know we have more flexibility now since forces are no longer committed there. We will be gaining some flexibly back. I find it said the R political people are coming down on the side of bashing the President because we are not going to keep troops there. On the other hand, I saw this R Military person, I think a commander, saying absolutely we should get out totally. He was so ashamed of the way the R politicians were acting that he said he is consider getting out of the party. Only Ron Paul came out in agreement that we get out totally. McCain, Michelle, Perry, Mitt, and Newt, they all wanted us to keep 20K troops there and used this as an opportunity to take shots at Obama. How surprising.

You constitutional rights continue to erode.
In other news, what is this crap about some bill passing the house that solidifies this crap where US citizen can be arrested and held without due process ? Very disappointed in Obama for pushing for the language that excluded American to get removed. Bad policy move and even worse political move. But they can go ahead an pass their bill. Lets see them do it. Then it will go to the supreme court and get challenged. But if you are like that scum bag they shot and you are overseas taking up terrorist activities against the US, I don't think anyone in the US is going to get their undies in a bundle.

Thank you for your service. Best hopes for Iraq moving forward.
To anyone here who served in this war or lived through the burden of supporting family that did, thank you for your service. I pray things work out for the Iraq people. I hope they find the will to create a better country for themselves and the world. They have been given a great opportunity at a great sacrifice and cost to the US. I hope they make the most of it.

[Induveca]

Please let this thread/personal blog die.

[fishercob]

Please let this thread/personal blog die.

I highly recommend the ignore function.

[Cramer]

Please let this thread/personal blog die.

[crackhed]

Please let this thread/personal blog die.

its beyond ridiculous