Forums | MacLife

sturner wrote:

My Rep is Republican. Guess which way he leans.

I wouldn't think he'd lean at all with that wide stance.

Lol, well, he is a law and order Republican. I just can't help but think that his take is that the administration has imperial powers.

My rep voted against (Susan Davis).

bedstuy wrote:

bratboy wrote:

Where is Obama on this? Shouldn't he perhaps say something about it?

dalink

(though nobody here's gonna like it)

You're right.

But I thought all liberals marched in lockstep behind their loved politicians ?

jerwin wrote:

I'm seeing a lot of this lately:
"Don't touch the richly deserved profits of our beloved corporations!"

I'm of the opinion that corporations should be damn grateful for the corporate veil. I want the corporations to understand that their very existence is a privilege, not a right. If corporations can't respect the rights f the American people, then the consequences must follow.

Really, think about this for just a few minutes.
That evil corp is owned by the wonderful American people that are so full of rights you wish to strip away as soon as they organize to do business.
Can you see the total disjointed logic here?

JakeTheTall wrote:

But I thought all liberals marched in lockstep behind their loved politicians ?

There's been a bit of an angry explosion across left-wing websites about this.

“That’s what this election is about. Unless and until you have a President of the United States who’s willing to stand up with some backbone and some guts and fight and stand up to these corporate interests, there will never be real change.”

John Edwards said that...

Who bears the responsibility for crimes committed by the corporation?

bratboy wrote:

Also from Greenwald:

Just in the first three months of 2008, recent lobbyist disclosure statements reveal that AT&T spent $5.2 million in lobbyist fees (putting it well ahead of its 2007 pace, when it spent just over $17 million). In the first quarter of 2008, Verizon spent $4.8 million on lobbyist fees, while Comcast spent $2.6 million. So in the first three months of this year, those three telecoms -- which would be among the biggest beneficiaries of telecom amnesty (right after the White House) -- spent a combined total of almost $13 million on lobbyists. They're on pace to spend more than $50 million on lobbying this year -- just those three companies.

Krusty wrote:

They drove a truckload of money to my home! I'm not made of stone!

Tallgeese wrote:

Can't you see the fundamental problem with the way corporations are in the U.S, which is that we essentially make it okay for a fictional body to do what it's not okay for an individual to do?

Example please.

Farmerkev wrote:

matt wrote:

Legislating corporations does not equal stripping away individuals' rights.

Corporations are granted privileges to act as an artificial legal entity, separate from the individual shareholders.

Denying a corporation such privilege has no effect on the rights of its shareholders.

Total disjointed logic is the belief that a corporation is somehow equal to its shareholders. Either corporations are actually entirely separate legal entities,  in which case restricting their actions is not restricting any individual's rights, or they should not be treated as a separate legal entity, and should instead be treated as a group of individuals, each liable for the actions of said corporation.

And will you extend this liability to other organizations?
Unions for example.

I believe that human beings should be the only legal entities having rights and responsibilities and that individual human beings should be responsible for their actions.

I'm not sure why you're asking this question, but if a union commits illegal actions, yes, their members should be responsible for their actions in said union.

If a union gets money in an illegal way or if its members gain from illegal activity, its members should be held responsible in the same way a corporation's shareholders should be held responsible.

bedstuy wrote:

bratboy wrote:

Where is Obama on this? Shouldn't he perhaps say something about it?

dalink

(though nobody here's gonna like it)

Ha ha ha  ha ha.

Let me catch my breath for a second.

Ha ha ha ha ha.

Tallgeese wrote:

What, the majority party can't stop the minority party from passing their legislation! The Democrats aren't spineless! This isn't their fault!

um, brainless should not be confused with spineless.