Home | Community | Message Board
You are not signed in.
Sign In New Account
Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery

Magic Mushrooms Zamnesia
This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.

General Interest > Political Discussion
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: North Spore North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies   Sporeworks.EU Spores for European Microscopy   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Original Sensible Seeds Bulk Cannabis Seeds

Jump to first unread post Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 |  [ show all ]
campaign finance reform
    #19822917 -

I'm hardly new here, I've been lurking since at least 2008. I'd consider
the overall political climate here to be libertarian with a dash of xenophobia.

I am a progressive, socially liberal for the most part, and I believe in a social safety net because: starving isn't a way to endear animals or people, poor people don't go away because we ignore them, and in general in modern not 1800 or 1950's times we have the resources to alleviate the painful burdon we all share, life.

Now I'm not for giving people who do nothing 20 grand a year, but there are three people to a job in the USA, so everyone can't be employed. If you thing three goes ino one, well, you can Have 1/3 a job. That is what we have here where I live. 8 dollar an hour factory temping mostly.

I don't think this is natural, and I do believe the globalization of the economy has happened, is happening, and you Have a better chance of running over the ocean barefoot then stopping it. Ya you could use terrifs to bring the factory jobs back, repeal the Free Trade Agreements that let our companies use the labor of countries without proper oversight for profit.

No, we would be better if things were more expensive, people made more, and we had a higher standard of living like Germany, who products more cars, and is kicking us around on green technology

We get kicked around on green tech while the apparent people like Hillary-rightwing-Clinton, Chris-Suck a Banker's Cock-christie, fight it out on a national stage drinking up dark money, and even plane money like they get for speaking a companies. You think they pay Hillary hundred of thousands to speak for no reason? Grow up,it's legal bribery. I reach around here, you fondle there.

They need the money to get elected, and to push out other viable parties that just don't tow the business line. Buckley v Veleo, Glass Steagale, the fact that our most powerful institutions are both people and have an obligation under the law to make every red cent they can. It's insanity, fucking INSANITY.

Corporations aren't people, money isn't speech. People are people, media is speech. The first amendment protects from tyranny, the second one was just put there to placate Virginia because they wanted to keep slaves from escaping north. I think today they'd just use sub dermal trackers instead of making such a poor rule in the most important of places.



Alright, I'm getting off track. What are your thoughts on campaign finance reform? If you do tink money is free speech, defend your position. I want publicly financed elections, but what parties get the money? How do we parse this, because we can't have eveyone dipping into the election finance jar.Damn, I'm seeing slight issue with my own position. I know I'm gonna probably get piled on by the libertarians, but at least it won't be starfire, shins, and zappa all circle jerking

also, wolf-pac.com, you all should know my position by now

also, spell check not working on my thing. sorry if it's tl and you dr, I ramble


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: campaign finance reform [Re: specialpeopleclub]
    #19822933 -

Would you cede the entire public expression of political thought to the wealthy who happen to own TV stations, radio stations and newspapers?

I wouldn't.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: campaign finance reform [Re: specialpeopleclub]
    #19822951 -

Welcome to the Shroomery specialpeopleclub.


--------------------


Rate me here

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: campaign finance reform [Re: Citizen X]
    #19823056 -

Thank you citizenX, much appriciation

I rarely do, but I agree zappa. It seems that way now though. Despite how foolish they look sucking dem cock like Mathews, or speculating that the Malaysian plane was taken to the Island by Jacob, they are taken seriously because they were the radio from the 60's untill now. Now they proect the owners through poor journalism and narrative controll
I myself am a big Younge Turks fan, and when I had cable I watched Maddow, Dylan Ratagin, and Democracy Now. I hardly believe they are right always, they are human after all, but it's head and shoulders above Beck,Cavuto,Ingram, Schultz, and all those tratorous fake libs who want Snowden to come get locked away forever...ahem...'face justice', and who defend the false war narratives. I fucking hate you Mathews


I'm also for trustbusting billion dollar companies


--------------------

Edited by specialpeopleclub (04/10/14 11:19 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: campaign finance reform [Re: zappaisgod]
    #19823163 -

zappaisgod said:
Would you cede the entire public expression of political thought to the wealthy who happen to own TV stations, radio stations and newspapers?

I wouldn't.


The news media being garbage has no causal link to campaign finance. They are both symptoms of corporations being too powerful. The same corporations that are buying the elections are buying the media. I don't really see the point you are trying to make here.


--------------------
Movie Thread - Reviews! Discussion! Fun!

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: campaign finance reform [Re: clock_of_omens]
    #19823276 -

The point I am making is that if one group gets to air political speech all groups must get to air political speech.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: campaign finance reform [Re: zappaisgod]
    #19823336 -

zappaisgod said:
The point I am making is that if one group gets to air political speech all groups must get to air political speech.


Giving money to candidates isn't speech. The corporations aren't having press conferences telling everyone where they are spending their money, they are giving it in secret. You're setting up a false equivalency.


--------------------
Movie Thread - Reviews! Discussion! Fun!

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: campaign finance reform [Re: zappaisgod]
    #19823379 -

I agree in a way. Free speech is not freedom of platform, or we' just line up at the national mall and everyone would get a piece. We have the internet, and dependingon where you go, it is a free platform.

No, the issue for me is that we really have one group speeking out of two mouths, one side just happens to be a bunch of blithering racests who want to try things like institutionalizing religion, and pander to every Cletus and Chastity around as though they can stop multiculteralism, and the others that are generally to weak to fight for any real progressive reform. ACA is a drop of spit in the bucket really

no, our media is not liberal
if only
if only

edit: really, unlimited? I disagree that the trasformation of the money ineo media constitutes the money as speech. That misses the point thogh. The higher the donations the more it becomes quid  want poloticions for people, not prostrating themselves for donations for next election on a constant basis


--------------------

Edited by specialpeopleclub (04/10/14 12:47 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: campaign finance reform [Re: clock_of_omens] * 2
    #19823384 -

clock_of_omens said:
zappaisgod said:
The point I am making is that if one group gets to air political speech all groups must get to air political speech.


Giving money to candidates isn't speech.


Yes it is.  What do you think the candidates do with the money?  Hint, they aren't allowed to buy diamond rings.  The have to spend it on the campaign, i.e speech.
Quote:
The corporations aren't having press conferences telling everyone where they are spending their money, they are giving it in secret.


So?  Frankly given what happened to the Mozilla guy there is an even stronger argument against revealing sources of donations.
Quote:
You're setting up a false equivalency.

No, I am not.  I don't think there should be any limits at all.  You think you should control media access.  Which of us is a thug?


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: campaign finance reform [Re: specialpeopleclub] * 2
    #19823390 -

specialpeopleclub said:
I agree in a way. Free speech is not freedom of platform, or we' just line up at the national mall and everyone would get a piece. We have the internet, and dependingon where you go, it is a free platform.

No, the issue for me is that we really have one group speeking out of two mouths, one side just happens to be a bunch of blithering racests who want to try things like institutionalizing religion, and pander to every Cletus and Chastity around as though they can stop multiculteralism, and the others that are generally to weak to fight for any real progressive reform. ACA is a drop of spit in the bucket really

no, our media is not liberal
if only
if only


Stop smoking so much pot.  It isn't serving you well.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: campaign finance reform [Re: zappaisgod]
    #19823422 -

No:okay:


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: campaign finance reform [Re: zappaisgod] * 1
    #19823507 -

Quote:
Yes it is.  What do you think the candidates do with the money?  Hint, they aren't allowed to buy diamond rings.  The have to spend it on the campaign, i.e speech.


Then they will write whatever legislation their corporate sponsors want them to. Corporate interests are not public interests. Corporations shouldn't have any involvement in elections.

Even if giving money to a candidate so they can campaign did constitute free speech, which I don't agree with, corporations are not people and therefore shouldn't have free speech in the first place.

Quote:
So?  Frankly given what happened to the Mozilla guy there is an even stronger argument against revealing sources of donations.


The fact that there was a backlash against him for donating to certain groups is not an argument against revealing sources at all. When the head of a company does something people don't like, there are business consequences; that's capitalism.

Quote:
No, I am not.  I don't think there should be any limits at all.  You think you should control media access.  Which of us is a thug?


Corporations have no trouble getting media access. This isn't even about the media. It's about candidates being beholden to the super rich because they can afford to give insane amounts of money.

Also nice job throwing in the thug buzzword.


--------------------
Movie Thread - Reviews! Discussion! Fun!

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: campaign finance reform [Re: clock_of_omens]
    #19823552 -

clock_of_omens said:
Quote:
Yes it is.  What do you think the candidates do with the money?  Hint, they aren't allowed to buy diamond rings.  The have to spend it on the campaign, i.e speech.


Then they will write whatever legislation their corporate sponsors want them to. Corporate interests are not public interests. Corporations shouldn't have any involvement in elections.


Who do you think owns corporations?  Martians?  They are as much a part of the public as you or I. 
Quote:


Even if giving money to a candidate so they can campaign did constitute free speech, which I don't agree with, corporations are not people and therefore shouldn't have free speech in the first place.


Corporations are owned by people.  Do you think unions should be forbidden from donating?
Quote:
Quote:
So?  Frankly given what happened to the Mozilla guy there is an even stronger argument against revealing sources of donations.


The fact that there was a backlash against him for donating to certain groups is not an argument against revealing sources at all. When the head of a company does something people don't like, there are business consequences; that's capitalism.


Where is the demand that Obama resign?  He had the exact same position at the exact same time.  Further, the guy's campaign activity was illegally leaked.  That's right the same Lois Lerner IRS leaked what was private information.  Again.  I can't wait to see her in a cell.
Quote:
Quote:
No, I am not.  I don't think there should be any limits at all.  You think you should control media access.  Which of us is a thug?


Corporations have no trouble getting media access. This isn't even about the media. It's about candidates being beholden to the super rich because they can afford to give insane amounts of money.


What about candidates being beholden to media companies?  Not a problem for you?  But other corporations and individual citizens are?  Fuck that.
Quote:


Also nice job throwing in the thug buzzword.


You want to stifle people's rights.  I don't.  Who is the thug?


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: campaign finance reform [Re: zappaisgod]
    #19823684 -

Quote:
Who do you think owns corporations?  Martians?  They are as much a part of the public as you or I.


Quote:
Corporations are owned by people.  Do you think unions should be forbidden from donating?


Obviously corporations are run by people. Something being run by a person does not make that thing a person. Yes, I do think that unions should be forbidden from donating. Campaigns should be publicly funded.

One could probably say something here about the fact that it would be taxpayer money that funds all these campaigns, but that just means all things will be equal money-wise when election day comes.


Quote:
Where is the demand that Obama resign?  He had the exact same position at the exact same time.  Further, the guy's campaign activity was illegally leaked.  That's right the same Lois Lerner IRS leaked what was private information.  Again.  I can't wait to see her in a cell.


Once again this is a false equivalency. For one, Obama is not the head of a corporation. He was elected into office and it is his job to hold opinions on political matters.

Secondly, the backlash wasn't because the CEO was against gay marriage, it was because he donated to groups actively fighting gay marriage.

As to your other point, I don't know what you are talking about.

Quote:
What about candidates being beholden to media companies?  Not a problem for you?  But other corporations and individual citizens are?  Fuck that.



How are candidates beholden to media companies? Also how does this have anything to do with campaign finance reform?


Quote:
You want to stifle people's rights.  I don't.  Who is the thug?


How do I want to stifle people's rights? Once again corporations are not people. I don't know who the thug is, why don't you just tell me?


--------------------
Movie Thread - Reviews! Discussion! Fun!

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: campaign finance reform [Re: clock_of_omens]
    #19823749 -

So, let me get this straight, you're okay if 1000 people put their money together in a trust and spend that money on advertising to get someone elected, but if those same 1000 people choose the corporate form instead of a trust, they shouldn't be allowed to do it?


--------------------
Censoring opposing views since 2014.



Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: campaign finance reform [Re: zappaisgod]
    #19823775 -

Iknow corperations are owned by people, but being owned by people and being a person isn't the same, especially when you can ise your extream resources to hide behind layers of burocracy you created by buying them i the first place

A conglomoration of stock holders, lawyers, CEO's, and a board of directors does not make a person.

Unions are differant and the counterweight to corperate greed. Sadly, as they wither the only huge doner to the dems dies. I'm a true prohressive, so the only ossue I have with that is that the religious fools on the other end. Oh, and no, they shouldn't donate either.
Unions are not people

What about being beholden to the media? I said free speech was media, you are talking aout being beholden to corperations. When I say media, I mean TV, paper, the intenet, not the owners of the media.

There was a time where there was little alternative media to those with printing presses, then telegraph, then phone, fax, internet. Thanks to what we have w don't have to be beholden to spoon fed naratives by fools in suits. Like I said, I like TYT. I disagree with them alot. Even today I disagreed that someone deserved getting sued for a stripper getting on gramma. I trisy them more because the whole suit an tie telepromter thing is dieing to make way for new media

You know what I think, every cantidate gets a website, there is an officiated list, and if you want to know what they think go there. Only half way interested people would, and none of thay Haratage Foundation/Americans for Prosparity double speak

Also,please impeach obama. He's a child killing, lead from behind corperatist

one last thing. If you can't tell thedifferance between blood and the abstract notion of a kollective working to make a profit, then I got a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you

No, clockofomens said it

public financing


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: campaign finance reform [Re: clock_of_omens]
    #19823848 -

clock_of_omens said:
Quote:
Who do you think owns corporations?  Martians?  They are as much a part of the public as you or I.


Quote:
Corporations are owned by people.  Do you think unions should be forbidden from donating?


Obviously corporations are run by people. Something being run by a person does not make that thing a person. Yes, I do think that unions should be forbidden from donating. Campaigns should be publicly funded.




No.  I do not want one single dollar of my tax money spent supporting any Democrat anywhere.  If I don't want the corporation I own stock in to contribute to somebody I can bring it up at the shareholders' meeting or I can sell my stock.  I should not have to renounce my citizenship in order to avoid contributing to the campaign of somebody I think is a piece of shit.  Corporations aren't just run by people.  They are owned by people. 
Quote:


One could probably say something here about the fact that it would be taxpayer money that funds all these campaigns, but that just means all things will be equal money-wise when election day comes.


Why should they have to be equal?  Do you not understand that the media gives billions of free support to the candidate of their choice?
Quote:
Quote:
Where is the demand that Obama resign?  He had the exact same position at the exact same time.  Further, the guy's campaign activity was illegally leaked.  That's right the same Lois Lerner IRS leaked what was private information.  Again.  I can't wait to see her in a cell.


Once again this is a false equivalency. For one, Obama is not the head of a corporation. He was elected into office and it is his job to hold opinions on political matters.


I'm just asking where is the call for Obama's ouster from these phonies.  Nowhere.  These are the same people who voted for him.  Fucking hypocrite swine.
Quote:
Secondly, the backlash wasn't because the CEO was against gay marriage, it was because he donated to groups actively fighting gay marriage.


He donated a whopping $1,000 at the same time Obama was actively opposing homosexual marriage.  Obama's opposition was worth far more that %$1,000.  Do you know who else opposed homosexuals marrying?  More than half of the people who voted on prop 8.
Quote:
As to your other point, I don't know what you are talking about.


The IRS leaked his private tax information.  That is against the law.
Quote:
Quote:
What about candidates being beholden to media companies?  Not a problem for you?  But other corporations and individual citizens are?  Fuck that.



How are candidates beholden to media companies? Also how does this have anything to do with campaign finance reform?


Are you joking?  Let me explain something to you that you seem to be utterly missing.  Newspapers and other media outlets are corporations that are information dispersal entities.  They can publish anything they want.  Refusing other corporations the same right is thuggery and elitism of a disgusting stripe.
Quote:



Quote:
You want to stifle people's rights.  I don't.  Who is the thug?


How do I want to stifle people's rights? Once again corporations are not people. I don't know who the thug is, why don't you just tell me?


You are.  Corporations are owned by people.  They have the right to pool their resources to speak publicly.  You don't have a problem with other people getting together to fund a campaign that they think is in their interests (news media corporations).  And what does being incorporated have to do with anything anyway?  I've owned a corporation.  Does that mean I couldn't contribute?

All this idiot whine about corporate this and corporate that is just a bunch of whiny bullshit from children who have no concept of what they are.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: campaign finance reform [Re: specialpeopleclub]
    #19823866 -

clock_of_omens said:
Campaigns should be publicly funded.


I don't wish to fund campaigns. Now what?


Quote:
corporations are not people and therefore shouldn't have free speech in the first place.


So you'd tax them but then gag them?



specialpeopleclub said:
public financing


I don't wish to fund campaigns. Now what?


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: campaign finance reform [Re: zappaisgod] * 1
    #19824042 -

1 Ya, because everyone can just get off there life to evaluate every company they have stock in pn a consistant basis. Companies are amoral,woshipping the dollar, they shouldn't be political.
I don't want money going to war, cry about it. I'm sorry a cantiate you like and one ou dislike would each get equal shares of 'your' taxes(mone and everyone's). It's way more fair then being big dicked by people with billions who have selfish motives

They should have some equivilancy, or money will rule the day as it does. You bitch like Obama is a lineral, he is a bought fuck. The media(companies, who are amoal money devourers) giving billions to the 'cantidate of its choice', well, where do I start. You are talking about eight giant corperations, of course they will. It should be illegal

I get, as a capitalist what is fair is not important to you, but campagns should be. Right or wrong, money paves the wa to over 90% of congressional victories. The Walten family owns as much wealth as the bottom 40%? 5 people. If money is speech, you should see why the way you are thinking is so childish.

You keep saying we habe no problems with the media financing campaigns, is this realy so hard to grasp?


non public financing of campagns is wrong


being run by people doesn't make you a person. GE /=/ person, you=person

We are mixing two things, first is campagn finance, the second is corperate personhood

If a corperation is a person, every one must have consequenses. If I killed 13 people, I'd be in prison. GM hides behind layers of burocracy. There should be an investigation, and those responsible should be punished in a perfect world.
This is not that, and this hoding behind actual people turns these corperations into false countries within borders. For what BP did, they should be stripped and dismantaled, GM, well, what's 13 less peolple?


to lovedeshrooms-I don't wanna fund the military, or subsidise meat or agreculture based on arbitrary laws that corperations developed for their benafit. I don't wanna pay for roads, or the postal service, or telephone polls
oh, wait, your point was stupid

the alternative is what we have, your statement is an assertion based on ignorance. Stop crying.

How would eavenly funding all parties on the ballot be bad, along with the destruction of polical action commities and social welfare groups(501c4 and 5 I think); or are you just a whiner? I read you and zappa, I can be an ass too. I know you are usedto push over progs, but your kid shit won't deter me. "I don't wanna fund campaigns", try again


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: campaign finance reform [Re: specialpeopleclub]
    #19824107 -

My point was stupid? The Constitution allows for funding the military. I agree that subsidizing meat and agriculture is wrong.

That doesn't negate my point nor make it stupid.

It does make your response a stupid one though.


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 |  [ show all ]

Shop: North Spore North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies   Sporeworks.EU Spores for European Microscopy   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Original Sensible Seeds Bulk Cannabis Seeds

General Interest > Political Discussion
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* LP Release: F/911 & "Campaign Finance Reform" Anonymous 417 0 07/06/04 07:32 AM
by Anonymous
* Campaign finance reform Silversoul 1,179 14 09/16/05 02:46 PM
by LeftyBurnz
* Annapurna1 must be in tears (campaign finance ruling)
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 all )		 luvdemshrooms 6,629 121 02/18/10 07:46 AM
by zappaisgod
* WAPO ..80% oppose SCOTUS corporate campaign funding... Annapurna1 534 2 02/17/10 04:32 PM
by zappaisgod
* a enacid 942 7 07/25/06 01:03 PM
by StroFun
* Campaign Overhaul unbeliever 501 2 10/26/04 02:32 PM
by JesusChrist
* Obama's phony banking "reform" | April 27th, 2010 PookztA 853 6 04/29/10 01:18 PM
by zappaisgod
* Obama campaign engaged in ongoing felony
( 1 2 3 4 all )		 Phred 6,010 79 10/25/08 10:11 AM
by Prisoner#1

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil, ballsalsa
4,183 topic views. 3 members, 55 guests and 26 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2026 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.027 seconds spending 0.006 seconds on 16 queries.