In response to:

Afraid to be a Card Carrying ACLU Liberal? You are not Alone

pgt Wrote: Aug 05, 2012 4:59 AM
I entered this thread to remind your audience that the ACLU was, and remains, on the right side of the Citizens United ruling. Do we have to inform the ignorant among us that corporate personhood was settled law more than a century before that decision?
Topeka Wrote: Aug 05, 2012 9:44 PM
pgt,

are you being disingenuous? ... ?

The ACLU's limited support of CU is based on the fact that without CU an opponent of ACLU's Hate could shut down numerous Left-Wing Agit Prop films.

In fact - if Corporations cannot spew Hate Filled Big Lies - .... opps there goes Hollyweird and all its propaganda movies... and ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, HBO and so forth. Their news is exempt as "jooornalism" but their documentaries and Agitprop would fall right under the definitions.

Also - the ACLU frequently uses the tactic of forcing ordinary citizens into corporations to join the political debate. Not to be fair, but often non-lawyers goof - and it lets the ACLU destroy the opposition based on failure to comply with reporting req's etc.
Topeka Wrote: Aug 05, 2012 9:51 PM
Also - as a small business - without CU I have no free speech rights what so ever.

The rules require one to be a business - and then you cannot create a documentary skewering the Big Liars and Phony Hypocrites who claim that you eat babies?

CU is a mandatory decision - without it the nation would be lost to the Liberals - and their Big Lie monopoly in the 4th Estate, Hollyweird, and Union financed Big Lie Hate Machines.
wtmoore1 Wrote: Aug 05, 2012 9:35 AM
Corporate personhood has a complex history in jurisprudence, and the Citizen's United decision only served to show how difficult that history is when extended and applied. Often, when the moral and logical underpinnings of Supreme Court decisions have been revised (e.g. interracial marriage, same-sex intercourse between consenting adults, etc.) then the decision itself is abrogated and overturned. I think many who have followed election law over the decades expected the trend of reasonable restrictions intended to battle against the dilution of individual votes to continue, and for some limitations to attach to corporate "personhood." Courts have recognized that corporations have some rights enjoyed by human beings, but not without limits.
johninohio Wrote: Aug 05, 2012 11:59 AM
As long as businesses (not just large corporations) have to pay taxes, but can't vote, they have a right to have a say in how their taxes are collected and spent. They do this through lobbying and suppport for their preferred candidates for office. If you don't like this influence, and I don't either, stop taxing them and cut way back on regulations.
Topeka Wrote: Aug 05, 2012 9:47 PM
Better yet,

cut the power of the administrative state...

and restore the power of law enforcement to enforce crimes such as fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, and embezzlement...

Influence peddling will take care of itself.

Corporations must lobby today - to not do so means death in the Semi-Socialist-Market of Kingmakers.. ...

Bill wrote: Where's the email? Who from and to whom? What did it say? This article is garbage as it provides no documentation. Not to mention that the source of the article has a bit of a slant.- Almost Union Free: ACLU, Union Caught in Reform Kill Plot

Dear Comrade Bill,

Did you really think I would write an article that goes to a million readers about a non-existent email? If you want a copy of the email and others like it, you can see this article by education expert Ben DeGrow. There are apparently a lot more just...