world

Republicans hit hard at each other in debate

98 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2011 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.

98 Comments
Login to comment

"Day of turmoil for GOP - and that's before debate"

And the turmoil turns into nightmare for Americans. A nefarious Texas governor Rick Perry announced that he is running for the president candidate today. Things will be getting very ugly.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Where to start with this line up? Here goes!

Romney: "corporations are people" ehhhh? Great thinking. In a country where corporations have laid off so many and exported so many jobs, this will come back to haunt him. Combined with his Mormon background, something looked at closesly will scare many mainstream religious types, his chances are about as good as mine for becoming GOP nominee.

Gingritch. Do we really have to relive the 90's? Really? This guy was a collossal pain in the neck in those days and I am sure he has not gained many friends since. A relic best left buried in the Clinton era. He could be a last ditch option if the GOP cannot invent someone better in time. But would rally my generation who would rather launch a second civil war than live under Gingritch rule.

Huntsman. Having grown up in Utah I have little good to say about the place. Huntsman is the least of most evils unleashed by the Mormon rule in Utah over the past decades. That said, again the bible thumpers from the GOP are not likely to look kindly upon this fringe faith background.

Ron Paul. I think all I need to write is "Ron Paul" kind of a self acting defeat building there. No debate required.

Perry sounds like the most viable if he joins so far. But that box has yet to be thoroughly explored. We shall see.

In short, there are no spectacular leaders here that can sweep the nation with a powerful mandate. Like Obama or hate him, he is thousands of times more charismatic than this lot put in a blender.

The GOP must do more soul searching to find their next big "thing" for the coming election. As of today, this line up is only just a hair more exciting than Japan's potential line up of PMs. More of the same old thing in slightly different packages. Lack luster, and uninspiring.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Like Obama or hate him, he is thousands of times more charismatic than this lot put in a blender.

Repubs have their shortcomings, but at least fostering the cult of personality that so many progressives crave is not among them. I really don't want a charismatic president, just a competent and experienced leader - something Obama is not.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I really don't want a charismatic president, just a competent and experienced leader

Republicans come up with goose eggs in all those categories. Any party where a loon like Bachmann is among the most competitive candidates is a party with serious problems.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Too bad there's no article yet on the debt "super committee."

Which Republican candidate will become most unhinged when one of the Republicans on the committee -- in a moment of sanity and responsibility -- breaks ranks with their screwy party?

Besides Bachmann, who's always unhinged, it's anyone's guess.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

BreitbartVictorious.

Well no worries for you my friend, not one of the potential candidates on the GOP side have a snowballs chance in hell of inspiring anything but concern in the general population.

As for competence....well... no wins there either. Huntsman is probably the least dreadful of the lot having done a few modest good things for otherwise dire Utah. But that would not encourage confidence in many.

So I guess with that in mind, and based upon your criteria, I guess you have not a single soul to offer up as a viable candidate using your vision of "progressive criteria" and yours.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Too bad Mitch Daniels is sitting this one out. Bachman can't win for the same reasons Palin can't - the RNC know the country is not going to elect for president, as it did in 2008, an untested entity coming to the job with a lot of opinions but scant leadership experience.

I am glad though that Palin and Bachman continue to keep themselves in the battle; the peculiar hatred reserved for conservative Christian women by a liberal media that imagines the rest of the country is on board with its 'progressive' agenda but just needs a nudge here or there will come back to injure those who seek to foment it in others.

Bachman may well win the Ames Straw Poll but I think then Perry steps up.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

BreitbartVictoriousAug. 12, 2011 - 10:42AM JST

just a competent and experienced leader - something Obama is not.

Obviously you cannot claim he is inexperienced anymore. He has more experience as president than of the rivals mentioned.

Competence is another matter. Although I don't think that is really what you mean. You don't like his policies, but that is not a question of competence.

In competence he is at least the equal of the candidates mentioned.

What will rule this election is the same as all the others. Americans will vote the way they believe will put more money in their pockets, and sanity, sense, responsibility and the welfare of none but themselves will be considered. Obama has not acheived the impossible task of making the economy boom, and so his position is weak. If the Republicans can talk enough business and economy, and make good sounded promises about those they too will not able to keep, one of them will win.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I am glad though that Palin and Bachman continue to keep themselves in the battle....

Breit, finally we agree on something!

the peculiar hatred reserved for conservative Christian women...

You're looking for a different word here than "hate," I think. What do you call dismay mixed with enjoyment? Something akin to schadenfreude, but different. There ought to be a word for it.

I think then Perry steps up.

This will be the most fun of all. It's time that Texas takes its place in the spotlight - that oh-so-prosperous land at the bottom of the heap on whatever health- or education-related metric you'd wish to use.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Bachman, Palin, Perry . . . the division between church and state? These people are making a mockery of the principles that make America great. They appeal to fringe groups of fanatics.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@Breitbart

peculiar hatred reserved for conservative Christian women.

1) It's not hatred; it's a fascinated horror that people like that still walk the Earth.

2) It's not that they're Christian. (I'm one myself). It's that they use religion to stir up primitive, unthinking hatreds in order to try and win support for their ultra-conservative, selfish (and to my mind utterly unchristian) ideas.

3) It's not that they're women. My mother, my wife and my daughter were all women last time I checked; I'd happily vote for any one of them.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Bachman, a semi-literate version of Palin, and the hate that comes out this woman: her husband runs a clinic that takes tax dollars to "retrain" gay people. Bachman is against gay marriage and supports her husband's work. How the tea party can support a woman who takes tax dollars to deprive people of their basic human rights is totally amazing.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Brietbart,

again with the "liberal media agenda" angle? Get real.

Here is CNN correspondant Jessica Yelling speaking to Anderson Cooper about her time at MSNBC, the self proclaimed "Anti-Fox News", in 2002-2003 :

Yellin: And my own experience at the White House was that, the higher the president's [Bush's] approval ratings, the more pressure I had from news executives -- and I was not at this network at the time -- but the more pressure I had from news executives to put on positive stories about the president.

I think, over time...

COOPER: You had pressure from news executives to put on positive stories about the president?

YELLIN: Not in that exact -- they wouldn't say it in that way, but they would edit my pieces. They would push me in different directions. They would turn down stories that were more critical and try to put on pieces that were more positive, yes. That was my experience.

Scary liberal agenda!

1 ( +1 / -0 )

"Huntsman is probably the least dreadful of the lot having done a few modest good things for otherwise dire Utah."

tkoind2 : Been to Utah a few times over the years and I think it was Huntsman who finally changed the liquor laws that required people to "join a club" ( get sponsored by a member,pay a fee, wink,wink) to get a drink in a bar. At least he has some good sense !

0 ( +0 / -0 )

paulinusa. Can't argue with that. Life behind the Zion-curtain did improve a bit with Huntsman. But to put him in perspective, he is still well right of the majority of American's on too many topics to appeal to the majority. Though the GOP would do better to run him that most of the poor choices that are lining up out there.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The only good candidate on the debate was Ron Paul. A man whom has already foretasted the financial crisis 20 years before it started with his understanding of the Austrian school of Economics. I am glad that the whole fiat money scheme is gaining quick traction ad a return to a gold standard ever closer. Same goes for the rest of the world as fiat currencies always die hard. Creditors were baffled when the dollar was de-pegged from gold back in 1971 and that it would not work. As it turns out they were right. As things get worse, massive de-regulations and massive spending cuts will be inevitable similar to what happen in Sweden during the 90's.

Gingrich.....? well he did balance the budget as house speaker during his time as house speaker during the 90's and under Clintons presidency. Other then that his marriage past will constantly haunt him.

Romney...? Same as Obama.

Herman? He worked at the board for the Federal reserve which makes him all too suspicious.

Santorum is another big statist/progressive.

Machman.... Neocon.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

BreitbartVictorious

If we had only web posts to judge the past few years, one would be led to believe that Obama, all by himself, should have been able to solve all of America's problems. But no one who takes politics seriously believes that.

Congress has weighed in heavily in making nearly everything Obama has tried to do, impossible to do. And the nut job Tea Party wackos have made it even hard for the GOP side to come up with any rational alternatives to Obama's ideas.

In short, the polarized nature of American politics since the end of the Clinton era are to blame for where we are today. Two intransigent, self interested parties who don't give a damn about working people failing to do much more than have testosterone pissing matches.

Government is in the pocket of the corporate world and their interests and working class interests are in direct conflict.

What America really needs is not another shift from right to left, but a new shift entirely off the usual playing field and the establishment of leaders who actually give a damn about people. Something none of the dull dry candidates in this article can offer.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

AerosXAug. 12, 2011 - 01:40PM JST

Other then that his marriage past will constantly haunt him.

You are probably right, but it better if it were his hypocrisy. I don't hold it against him that he had an affair with a congressional page. I hold it against him that he vehemently went after other Congressmen for dating pages and vehemently went after Clinton for an affair, and while he was going after Clinton was doing both things with the same women! Just astounding! He never apologized and no indication he has changed.

But even the hypocrisy is not the worst of Newt. It requires an attempt to have principles and morals to be a hypocrite. Newt does not even try! He simply does whatever he can to gain political advantage, full stop. Its nothing but a power game to him and he would sell his own mother if it gave him an edge. That Republicans, who claim to be moral, have not completely jettisoned that immoral creature is proof of how lost they are.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

I really don't care about America or American politics anymore. The politicians alone make America the most pathetic nation on the planet.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Here is CNN correspondant Jessica Yelling speaking to Anderson Cooper about her time at MSNBC, the self proclaimed "Anti-Fox News", in 2002-2003 :

Yellin: And my own experience at the White House was that, the higher the president's [Bush's] approval ratings, the more pressure I had from news executives -- and I was not at this network at the time -- but the more pressure I had from news executives to put on positive stories about the president.

2002-2003......Right after Sept 11th and the whole world was behind us, as we gearing up for war in Afghanistan to oust the Taliban and Jessica wanted to write 'negative stories' about George Bush at the time, unbelievable.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Jeffrey, as the number one economy and largest creator of economic activity on the planet, you should care a great deal what goes on in America. It WILL effect you no matter where in the industrialized world you live. And thus cannot be ignored even if we wish we could.

Instead we should take a vested interest in what happens and help American's hear voices of reason from their friends around the world.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The clear winner tonight, Obama. Maybe Perry since he was not there did not come off like an idiot as most did tonight. This is the best the republicans can do? Only Huntsman is normal. The rest are either batty or in the case of bachman scary. She looks like she is about to bite you in the neck most of the time. Santorum, thank god no one takes him seriously. He was an awful senator and would be worse than bush as president, if that is even possible. His idiotic statements about polygamy for example, he said some states were proposing that. Maybe he meant Utah where Mitt and Huntsman are from?

2 ( +2 / -0 )

@sailwind

So you're saying "Don't criticise the government when the nation's at war"? You ever read 1984?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

lucabrasi. I wish more people would read Orwell. A lot to learn in that book.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

"There is nothing wrong with our country. There is something wrong with our politics,”

He would know, being one of the larger problems himself.

"I won't eat Barack Obama's dog food"

Why eat dog food at all?

"The corporations are people".

Wasn't soylent green as well?

1 ( +1 / -0 )

I think when you consider which one of these clowns is the least phoney, anti-American, misguided and clueless, there’s not really much in it to be honest.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

You ever read 1984?

Read it? I read when I was a young lad at 16 and it molded a lot of my political beliefs that have stayed with me my entire life. One of the main lessons from the book I have carried with me all my life is that context is important. The ability of a political system to change the context on its whims to suit "the current truth" such as the meme that the Tea Party is now "extremists". And also it is also totally off topic to the germaine point your trying to counter with by using 1984 as an example as you failed to mention anything to do with the context in your original post.

Context: The U.S was brutally attacked as a complete suprise on Sept 11th just as she was on Dec 6th 1941. The nation was united just as it was after that fateful day in Dec. Our press reflected that unity just as they did with FDR they extended that same coverage under the umbrella of national unity to GWB. The press was putting national unity ahead because that was exactly what was happening in the country to report. It should come as no suprise given the context of the times that "ace reporter" Jessica who seems to have wanted to report her bias instead of objective reporting given the context of the events, that her editors would have been a little more disposed not to run with her negative slanted stories.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sailwind: “Context: The U.S was brutally attacked as a complete suprise on Sept 11th just as she was on Dec 6th 1941.”

REALITY: Complete and utter rubbish. GWB and co received warning of an attack using aircraft months before 911.

Sailwind: “The press was putting national unity ahead because that was exactly what was happening in the country to report.”

REALITY: Except if you were a conservative, in which case EVERY Muslim was a potential terrorist.

Sadly, little has changed in America.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

sailwind... What? You accuse others of not making their point when your last post reads like you put it in a blender first.

9/11 is in the past mate. We are talking about the 2012 election and who may best represent the GOP. Like it or not the curren line up is less than inspiring, in most cases. But also full of a not of nuts with bizarre positions.

And you must acknowledge that the GOP is burdened with the extreme views of the Tea Party bunch that have essentially torpedoed anything the GOP have tried to do this year. This is a problem you will need to solve before election time. One I doubt the GOP can easily address.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

"Debate" didn't use to mean only name-calling and smart-alecky innuendo. But okay, I hadn't realized how multi-purpose “That sounds a lot like Barack Obama if you ask me" could be. I guess it could be used as a response to almost anything.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@sailwind

The point I was trying to make is that you can't expect all journalists to suddenly get undritically behind government policy just because that government is choosing to go to war. In fact, it's at times of crisis that we need especial scrutiny of what our leaders are getting up to.

Surely you wouldn't deem it "unbelievable" that some (few) parts of the Japanese media are crticising the current government over Fukushima? Or do you think they should all shut up and produce only articles supportive of government policy?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sailwind,

objective reporting would involve both positive AND negative stories. Her point was the negative aspect of the President was being suppressed. When you think about all that has come to light since 9/11, including the fact that we knew it was going to happen and could have stopped it (link: http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2006/07/10/060710fa_fact_wright?currentPage=6) and how Bush and his administration pretty much bungled everything, including how they conducted the war, don't you think some negative reporting actually would have benefited the American people?

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Bachman, Palin, Perry . . . the division between church and state? These people are making a mockery of the principles that make America great. They appeal to fringe groups of fanatics.

@soundandthefury: So help me understand, you say that Perry is violating the division of church and state, I guess you are basing this on his recent Pray for America meeting. Then I guess Obama is just as guilty, since yesterday he celebratged the Iftar Dinner celebrated by Muslims during Ramadan. He even went so far as to say that Muslims have been an intergral part of the American history (that's another story). So, hosting a dinner like that, in the White House, is that violating the seperation of Church and State in your opinion, or is that only reserved for Christians? Just curious>

0 ( +0 / -0 )

uncritically

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The clear winner tonight, Obama.

@zurcronium: So when Axelrod and the Obama campaign machine say that the way they are going after Romney is to attack him and not talk about the gains made under Obama, I think the real winner was anyone of the persons on the stage. No matter who the Rep nominee is, they can expect dirty politics from the same person who urged us all to be civil in the political arena.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

As a registered Democrat I got to say Perry has me worried. Obama needs to face a challenger in the Democratic primary. We need to create jobs. Where are the old-fashioned Democrats?? Obama is almost irrelevant at this point. He jawbones, but no one listens anymore.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Alphaape. And just what do you base these assertions on. The treatment of Obama by the right has been shameful from day one. Escpecially from the fringe right who I think have even alienated the most conservative mainstream of the GOP.

There were no winners on that stage. Not a thing to do with Obama. But the simple fact that these are not the kind of stellar leaders that the country needs. These are not people who can reach across the isle to make unity in congress. Nor are the people who will inspire the majority of American's to throw their support behind him. They are lack luster and baggage laden establishment politicians who can and will offer only more of the same.

Working people need real representation. No matter what party it comes from. Not more of the same old nonsense.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

The point I was trying to make is that you can't expect all journalists to suddenly get undritically behind government policy just because that government is choosing to go to war.

No offense, but I do expect professional journalists to report uncritically whether positive and negative on whatever the facts may be falling on a story and leave their personal opinions and political leanings out on the stories they cover.

There is a reason newspapers have Op-Ed sections and the media also has plenty of commentators that fulfill the function of showing their particular viewpoints outside of the original reporting of a story.

Surely you wouldn't deem it "unbelievable" that some (few) parts of the Japanese media are crticising the current government over Fukushima?

Not now, But right after the quake. The focus was more on getting the Nuclear plant under control and the herioc efforts of those tasked with doing it. Until the plant was stable do you think reporting how crappy the J-GOV was and its policy during that critical time would have been helpful? Plenty of ink on that afterwards but not during the actual crisis..........Context again.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

sailwindAug. 12, 2011 - 02:26PM JST

Right after Sept 11th and the whole world was behind us, as we gearing up for war in Afghanistan to oust the Taliban and Jessica wanted to write 'negative stories' about George Bush at the time, unbelievable.

So, you don't even possess the gift of hindsight? Bush, and his wars, are extremely unpopular now, as unpopular as they all were with me even at that time. Apparently, I have both hindsight and foresight.

You don't represent Republicans, but I thank for doing your best to undermine them anyway. There are all sorts of things I can forgive you know, but launching wars that will do us no good is something it seems Republicans like to do, then later act like everything is fine. I don't approve of Obama's spending, and I don't approve of his continuation of Afghanistan, but at least he did not start it. I would love to see someone come along who will finish the wars and not start a new one. Please name that man. He must be an independent!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The Republican presidential debate may just as well have been a debate on which GOP candidate has a better plan to further bankrupt America, alienate its allies and shaft middle and lower class Americans.

On that point, I'd say they are all in the running.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

SushiSake3. Well said!

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

All the energy and initiative in American politics since about mid-2009 has been on the right. The headline says they hit hard at each other. I wish Democrats would start hitting each other a little harder. The anti-incumbent rage isn't just on the right these days.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sailwind,

Read that story. The one I provided a link to. All ten pages. Then you tell me critical journalism has no place in America.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Come one Lieberman2012. Under Clinton we had greater prosperity and less deficit than we did under Bush. The right has been instrumental in bankrupting the nation with two pointless wars. All the while empowering the financial industry to rob us blind and put the entire global economy in danger thanks the right's obsession with derregulation.

Well done indeed. All the "Energy" has been from the right. The sad thing is that all that energy has been negative energy making matters far worst than they were before. So if that is indeed your point, then well done GOP for a smashing job of smashing everything to bits.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Dream line up: Ron Paul on the Republican side and Dennis Kucinich on the Democrat side.

America (and indeed the world) needs Ron Paul and/or Dennis Kucinich.

Look up any of their videos on YouTube.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"Under Clinton we had greater prosperity and less deficit than we did under Bush. "

Yeah tkoind, We also had welfare reform, which was good, but which Obama quietly repealed. It made me ashamed to be a Democrat. I think most independents and even Republicans would happily return to the spending levels we had under Clinton. But the current Democratic leadership won' have any of that.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The Republican presidential debate may just as well have been a debate on which GOP candidate has a better plan to further bankrupt America, alienate its allies and shaft middle and lower class Americans.

So hey sushisake3 are you telling us you watched the Republicns debate? Did you listen to it on the radio? It's pretty clear from your posts you aren't eleigible to vote in the US. I think you fail to realize how you undermine the party you pretend you support. You are highly critical of America in just about everything. And then you come on here saying it is Republicans who are going to destroy the country, but it's a country other American readers of this forum, independents as well as Republicans, know you would like to see destroyed. Not as clever as you think.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

At what point did Americans decide that we can achieve our perfect society by cutting off the poor. Instead of trying to resolve the problems that lead to poverty, and instead of trying to share the wealth of society in constructive ways, this idiotic notion that we can ignore problems and leave people to fend has arrisen and is now a major danger to the integrity of our society.

You should be ashamed to think that such thinking is ok. It is far better to invest in the poor to build a community of working, tax paying people who contribute to society rather than allowing the problems to go unsolved and create a segment of society that you end up paying for anyway. Because ignoring them means more law enforcement costs, more emergent social welfare, more general social conflict and issues, more problems period.

You cannot wish these problems away with some 1800's survive of die idiocy. You have to address these problems as facets of society, which they are. And you have to do so in constructive ways that lead to breaking cycles of poverty not perpetuating them.

The right so often goes on about their "Christian Values" but so rarely demonstrates them in practice. Their Jesus taught that if you have two loaves of bread, you should give one to the person who has none. A less you right wingers clearly missed.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

The treatment of Obama by the right has been shameful from day one. Escpecially from the fringe right who I think have even alienated the most conservative mainstream of the GOP.

@tkoind2: What about the treatment of "W" by the far left. I remember people like Cod Pink protesting W at his ranch for being in the wars in Afg and Iraq. I don't see them up at Martha's Vineyard doing the same to Obama.

These are not people who can reach across the isle to make unity in congress. Nor are the people who will inspire the majority of American's to throw their support behind him. They are lack luster and baggage laden establishment politicians who can and will offer only more of the same.

I don't think so. Not sure whom I will support, but it is probably more the opposite. The Dems will not make a step across the aisle to compromise. Just like Obama, he is such an ideolouge that he is the one that can't reach across the aisle, since he is afraid of losing his base support. At least Bill Clinton, who was an ideaolouge was able to reach across the aisle and push items like Welfare reform.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Lieberman: "So hey sushisake3 are you telling us you watched the Republicns debate? Did you listen to it on the radio? It's pretty clear from your posts you aren't eleigible to vote in the US. I think you fail to realize how you undermine the party you pretend you support. You are highly critical of America in just about everything. And then you come on here saying it is Republicans who are going to destroy the country, but it's a country other American readers of this forum, independents as well as Republicans, know you would like to see destroyed. Not as clever as you think."

Ditto for your post. Of course I don't want to see America "destroyed". That is a ridiculous claim to make. A healthy U.S. economy is a healthy global economy.

What gets me is that many conservatives don't seem to get that. We just witnessed the TPers bring the U.S. economy to the brink of default - for what? To prove to their constituents that they were true to their word?

Maybe, but they are so incredibly short-sighted that they couldn't seem to be able to understand the global ramifications, or that yes - there actually is a world outside America, a point that seems completely lost on many conservatives.

Leiberman: "And then you come on here saying it is Republicans who are going to destroy the country."

Sorry, I must have mispoke: Republicans HAVE destroyed the country.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The treatment of W had nothing to do with race, while much of the treatment of Obama clearly does.

W. Started two wars. Obama has been tasked with trying to finish them. People don't like wars, so what do you expect? Just everyone going along wtih such bad ideas? Protests would have happend even if Obama had started a war. I for one would have been there.

Come on Alphaape, the extreme possition of the GOP this last couple years has been very intransigent. And when it was open to compromise the extremist Tea Party lot shot down any hope of working together.

Now let's be clear. I am not a DEM or GOP supporter. I think both parties represent the rich and big business. They do not represent working class people. So I think the nation would be better of if neither won.

That said. I do wish they would think about the needs of working people instead of their idiotic dogmas and try to get some real work done. Like making sure working people can get jobs and have education and healthcare for their families. This is not a left or right position. It is a common man's view of what people need.

But neither party does a good job of looking out for the vast majority of Americans. They are both too busy drawing lines between themselves.

I am sick to death of the partisan BS that plagues American politics. It is nearly as bad as the inept leadership here in Japan. No party in the US has a license on good thinking. It hink both lost their subscriptions to caring for ordinary Americans a long time ago.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

SushiSake3. The sad truth is people like Lieberman2012 don't get that both parties SUCK. Neither party takes care of the working people. And that is the problem. All this partisanship is like highschool rallies before a football game. All they really care about is showing that their flag is the highest flag on the field and their team is the best. The interests of working people be damned in the process.

Sadly we saw that same thinking show just how little they care about the entire global economy. We are led by people with little more common sense than a collection of jocks at a highschool.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

tkoind - "All they really care about is showing that their flag is the highest flag on the field and their team is the best."

A typically idiot male trait, I might add.

"We are led by people with little more common sense than a collection of jocks at a highschool."

tkoind - No, I disagree. The key difference is the GOP/conservatives acutally WANT and are making every effort to reduce their own parents of welfare benefits.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

tkoind2Aug. 12, 2011 - 04:19PM JST

Their Jesus taught that if you have two loaves of bread, you should give one to the person who has none. A less you right wingers clearly missed.

Nah. They just reduced their intake of bread. And they are always careful to only buy one loaf at a time! He was talking about bread wasn't he? Good thing he was not talking about money! LOL.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Pawlenty: The more he tries to be like Bachmann, the more he diminishes what little of himself he ever had. Bachmann: Palin without the baggage. Huntsman: Noun, a person who brings a knife to a gun party. Gingrich: A nominal candidate but a factual carrion eater. Evidence: wives. Paul: What intelligence looks like when its actions are disconnected from consequences. Santorum: The guy to make the crazy candidates look balanced. Cain: Nomination as likely as Debito Arudou for the LDP. Romney: He'd do exactly what Obama is doing now, except he'd be white and Republican.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Every one of the Republican candidates, to a person, showed they were unfit to compromise and therefore unfit for any leadership position in the United States beyond dogcatcher, much less higher office.

The key question was this: Would you walk away from a deficit-cutting deal that involved 10 dollars of cuts for every 1 dollar of additional taxes? (Every Republican candidate indicated they would walk away from such a deal.)

This is why Standard & Poor's downgrade of the US credit rating specified it was this very uncompromising attitude of the Republicans that is the reason.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Romney, "Corporations are people.".

Immediately after I heard this , I said, "Goodbye, Sayonara, and Oyasuminasai, Romney."

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The right so often goes on about their "Christian Values" but so rarely demonstrates them in practice. Their Jesus taught that if you have two loaves of bread, you should give one to the person who has none. A less you right wingers clearly missed.

Hey, it gets even better than that: South Carolina representative Tim Scott -- a token who once fought to have the ten commandments posted on every government building -- also fought to take away that one loaf of bread given to the poor. He co-sponsored legislation designed to deny food stamps to any poor family made eligible because either breadwinner was involved in a labor dispute.

I believe the name of the legislation was the "Assistance to Wealthy Business Owners to Starve Workers into Submission Bill."

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Hey, It gets even better than that: South Carolina representative Tim Scott-- a token

Yabits,

A token what? Please clarify.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Best question of the event, would Crazy Legs Bachman submit to her husband if she were President. Answer, total dodge about submittal being respect. Face it, if she did win her husband who looks to be an in the closet poofer would be running the country. LIke when Nancy ran the country while Reagan was senile, about 70 percent of his time in office.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

tkoind2

At what point did Americans decide that we can achieve our perfect society by cutting off the poor.

Conservative and Libertarian Americans don't believe in a 'perfect society' . Can you show us one? What keeps you from moving there? And for the umpteenth time 'poor' is a completely relative term. Millions of Mexicans and Cubans risk their lives to be 'poor' in America.

The right so often goes on about their "Christian Values" but so rarely demonstrates them in practice.

The modern Left, in contrast, believes it is wrong to have any values other than that of 'non-discrimination.' Make blanket denouncements of war, poverty, pollution,'intolerance' and illiteracy and then promise to fix these problems (with other peoples money) and you are a secular saint.

Their Jesus taught that if you have two loaves of bread, you should give one to the person who has none.

Did the lesson end there? Do you truly help a person when you provide for all their needs (provided they in repay you by keeping you in power...) and thereby deprive him/her of the opportunity to discover what they are made of, what they can do if they educate and apply themselves?

People like you love to do this little switch:you paint conservatives as 'social darwinists' and then cynically try and use the example of Christ, believing you can shame them;but if someone like Bachman or Palin or Romney discusses their Christian faith you ridicule them for it and accuse them of opposing scientific concepts like Darwinism, if not science itself.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I believe the name of the legislation was the "Assistance to Wealthy Business Owners to Starve Workers into Submission Bill."

I see someone still believes in Marx's long ago refuted "Iron Law of Wages.'

0 ( +0 / -0 )

A token what?

It's not a token "what," but just a token. A member of a minority community used by members of a majority group to prove that they are accepting. The acceptance is granted as long as the token keeps in line, and quickly disappears when the token deviates from it. (See: Colin Powell.) It is neither Scott's nor Powell's fault entirely that many ignorant people descended from Europeans want to use them in that way.

Although I'm sure that Scott would agree with the words of that old Negro spiritual: "If it feels this good being used, you just keep on using me, 'till you use me up."

Face it, if she did win her husband who looks to be an in the closet poofer would be running the country.

Come now, Marcus Bachmann will make an excellent First Lady -- one who can interior decorate and select china with the best of them. He's got to be relishing the dream to have many Log Cabin Republicans over to stay for "healing sessions."

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

sushisake3

"No, I disagree. The key difference is the GOP/conservatives acutally WANT and are making every effort to reduce their own parents of welfare benefits."

Have any examples of this? I don't know too many conservatives whose parents are on welfare. Do you even understand what the debate is here? and what the proper terms are?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Yabits,

Got it. Tim Scott is nothing more than an African American who was entrusted by the voters of his district to represent them as long ass he tows the line. I sure he does not get uppity and actually think he was voted in because his district actually liked what he stood and campaigned for. I also hope he does not wake up and realize that the voters on his district played a big joke on him and are just using him.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

yabits

It is neither Scott's nor Powell's fault entirely that many ignorant people descended from Europeans want to use them in that way.

Puttin that in your 1,500 page manifesto?

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Perry's prayers not being answered.

The whole god thing in the republican is ridiculous, each of the candidates claims to be be chosen by god to be president. Either they are deluded or god is playing a cruel joke on them all. Like with Perry, he thinks prayer is the answer to the problems in texas. He prays for rain and the state gets dryer. July was the hottest month every in Texas (of course there is no climate change going on). Then Perry prays for the economic welfare of the US with 30,000 fellow rubes and the next business day the stock market goes down by over 600 points. God indeed does seem to have a sense of humor, the joke of course is on the republicans.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Got it. Tim Scott is nothing more than an African American who was entrusted by the voters of his district to represent them as long ass he tows the line.

As a firm believer in human potential, it is my opinion that any human being can rise far above the dregs of the conservative mindset. So Tim Scott is quite likely much more than the token he's allowed himself to play for the moment.

I sure he does not get uppity and actually think he was voted in because his district actually liked what he stood and campaigned for.

I should hope he is intelligent enough to realize that his blackness gave him a distinct advantage so that any white could point him out as an example of their inclusiveness -- just as you have. Meanwhile, to the vast majority of his own community, the one in which he enjoyed and took advantage of the benefits of affirmative action for years -- he remains at best a curiosity. A chicken clucking the praises of Colonel Sanders, trying to lure other chickens into the pot.

I also hope he does not wake up...

Finally an honest statement: It is the fervent Republican hope that no voter in America wakes up.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

And for the umpteenth time 'poor' is a completely relative term.

We're in agreement again! What a day! I lived in China in the '80s and let me tell you, the poverty I saw was indescribable. That is beside the point, however; the subject is what we call a "living wage," and that is insuperable from the social contract. Those who play by the rules but nonetheless starve have a moral right to revolt; it is society's responsibility to provide a path for them.

promise to fix these problems (with other peoples money) and you are a secular saint.

Progress, not perfection. Problems will always exist, but to sit idle while egregious ones fester is the antithesis of government. Also, by the way, history has a way of debating whose money the money is. Stewart had a field day recently discussing how the word "rich" has been banished from discourse (he talked about a cake mix being "moist and job creating") - it is useful to remember that the coin has another side. Without American laborers, "job creators" would be out banging metal or pouring concrete themselves.

More respect for the working man, and more compassion for the disabled, is not too much to ask.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Conservative and Libertarian Americans don't believe in a 'perfect society' . Can you show us one?

That's for sure. Everything for conservatives -- including and especially religion -- is a means to an end. And that end, as you've said, is not some perfect heaven. So when it is written: "Be ye perfect..." conservatives reject it entirely.

So what is the conservatives' core belief? One way to express it is that the world is a type of hell, and the goal is to carve out of it as nice an existence as possible for oneself and one's progeny, no matter how much suffering or damage is caused to others in the process, within the limits of temporal law. In so doing, the conservatives of every tribe make the world more hellish -- and their core viewpoint a self-sustaining cycle.

The modern Left, in contrast, believes it is wrong to have any values other than that of 'non-discrimination.'

What total bunk, and proves that you can't trust a conservative to frame any argument honestly. The liberal premise is simple: Seek the truth, and be willing to change as the truth unfolds -- never pretending that anyone can see the whole truth. Other than truth-seeking, the strongest liberal value is compassion.

Do you truly help a person when you provide for all their needs (provided they in repay you by keeping you in power...) and thereby deprive him/her of the opportunity to discover what they are made of, what they can do if they educate and apply themselves?

It appears that the conservative way of imparting that lesson is to leave people the victims of circumstance -- which Republicans appear to justify to themselves the same way as those who passed by the person who was helped eventually by the Samaritan. Unable to give their all, conservatives make a big show of what relative little they do give, defeating the purpose of giving.

believing you can shame them

Oh no. No such belief there. The last person who successfully shamed the conservatives of his day was nailed to a cross. In their lust for accruing worldly power, people like Bachmann and Romney only use their religious beliefs as a prop, while serving their true master.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

@ tkoin2

The sad truth is people like Lieberman2012 don't get that both parties SUCK. Neither party takes care of the working people. And that is the problem.

Ironically it's the opposite. The govt cares so much that they actually believe they can help the people out with so many burdensome regulations and endless entitlement programs with so many untended consequences. If SS, Medicare, Medicare and the HUD is not enough, then clearly you want govt to do everything.

Their Jesus taught that if you have two loaves of bread, you should give one to the person who has none

Yes, Jesus of Nazareth did i fact preach this. But did you know he made charitable acts voluntarily so? He never forced or demanded that govt take wealth away from one group of people and give it to another. That is the faulty in the logic of statist/progressives like yourself. It is the reason why absolutely NO other nation on this earth is more charitable then the U.S, because of individual charity.

I encourage you to read about the Austrian school of economics, and to read about Ludwig Von Mises, Carl Menger, F.A Hayek and Peter schiff.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Those who play by the rules but nonetheless starve have a moral right to revolt; it is society's responsibility to provide a path for them.

Laguna, your posts are very well written. Many people will strongly disagree with your statement above, but you've hit on a very important point.

Any society which does not actively and tirelessly provide and promote a way for people who play by rules to succeed -- at least at maintaining a basic standard of living -- will certainly come to an end because people will no longer believe in the system, and seek to create a new one. While the relative few who have "succeeded" will fight like hell to preserve it, even if it means keeping millions of people down.

This happened in the former communist countries, where people were allowed the basics but never to succeed beyond a fraction of what their talents and capabilities might allow. Those societies thus became very conservative and resistant to change, until the time it was widely acknowledged that nobody believed in the system anymore. In today's United States, the similarities to sclerotic former Iron Curtain states are become more pronounced and numerous.

The big enemy of the communist state was worker organizations -- like Solidarity -- that were not controlled by the "management" class of the state. Ironically, the idea that workers have interests that diverge from those of management is not acknowledged in America. Therefore, the idea that workers should be encouraged to assemble together around those interests is fought against just as strongly as in communist bloc countries.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

He never forced or demanded that govt take wealth away from one group of people and give it to another.

This is not true. The laws that he was perfect in fulfilling should be studied. (Besides the obvious fact that he admonished that Caesar should be paid that which he felt he was owed.) The ancient laws prohibited usury, mandated that ten percent of any increase of wealth be allotted to the poor, and that each 50th year would see a complete forgiveness of debts and all land returned to the groups to which it was originally portioned out.

It is also worth noting that the one time the carpenter from Nazareth showed "incivility" and "intolerance" in public was in dealing with the handlers of money.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

That was kind of you, Yabits. Still, I'm more fixated on "history has a way of debating whose money the money is." Clearly, revolutions are wasteful and should be avoided whenever possible, but that does not mean at all cost - and I trust that Americans will be with me on this. The American Revolution, after all, was more about money than it was about anything else.

Truth be told, though, the era of inventor-capitalist, if it ever did exist, is over. Edison invented the light bulb; Ford invented the mass-produced automobile: as historical fiction, perhaps that can be accepted, but: Gates invented Windows? Not to berate Gates - just the opposite: he's one of the great philanthropists of our age - my point is that a phalanx of ordinary workers are integral to every inch our society progresses in the modern era. Think of the guy who invented the blue LED. Kinda useful, the blue LED. What did he get for it? A lot, actually, but only after leaving Japan and suing the hell out of the company that he'd been working for, eighty hours a week for years on end, which had paid him a pittance for it.

That is of course an exceptional example, but more conventional ones clearly abound: that is why productivity has exploded as it has. Sadly for the foot soldiers who have driven this, their gains have gone in others' pockets. A company is no more a "person" than is a car or a school; a company is a means to an end - or, more precisely, to ends: that of providing goods of value to society,and that of providing a living to employees. It is unfortunate that the latter has been so neglected in our modern world.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

As a firm believer in human potential, it is my opinion that any human being can rise far above the dregs of the conservative mindset. So Tim Scott is quite likely much more than the token he's allowed himself to play for the moment.

Agreed, just a useful Idiot.

I should hope he is intelligent enough to realize that his blackness gave him a distinct advantage so that any white could point him out as an example of their inclusiveness -- just as you have

I'll let this just stand for what it is.....

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Is democracy the best form of government? Looking at the Americans list of candidates on the right and the value of democracy seems dubious -- Bachman? Are you serious? She does not understand the division between church and state, nor does Perry. And Romney? How can anyone take Mormons seriously. Time to return to government run by educated people, the common man does not need to be consulted.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

"Romney... declared that "corporations are people" drawing ridicule from Democrats"

Democrats believe corporations are evil organizations run by Skynet terminators.

yabits: "the dregs of the conservative mindset"

These six words explain virtually all of yabits' posts.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

That is of course an exceptional example, but more conventional ones clearly abound: that is why productivity has exploded as it has. Sadly for the foot soldiers who have driven this, their gains have gone in others' pockets. A company is no more a "person" than is a car or a school; a company is a means to an end - or, more precisely, to ends: that of providing goods of value to society,and that of providing a living to employees. It is unfortunate that the latter has been so neglected in our modern world.

Got it.

Cornerstone of progressive economics and ethics. Collectively, all losses and gains sum to zero. Your loss is our gain, and your gain is our loss. Whatever you own, it is at our expense. You owe your property to us by the virtue of you owning it. Losers contribute to the society and winners take away from it. Being a winner is immoral and selfish. A society of losers is happy and moral. In this sense, the United States is the worst society in the world. Americans eat because other people starve. On our planet with limited resources, the most ethical thing one can do is stop eating and starve to death. Bourgeois ideologues will lie to you that economy is a non-Zero-Sum game and that capitalism creates wealth without making others poor.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Leiberman2012: So hey sushisake3 are you telling us you watched the Republicns debate? Did you listen to it on the radio? It's pretty clear from your posts you aren't eleigible to vote in the US. I think you fail to realize how you undermine the party you pretend you support. You are highly critical of America in just about everything. And then you come on here saying it is Republicans who are going to destroy the country, but it's a country other American readers of this forum, independents as well as Republicans, know you would like to see destroyed. Not as clever as you think.

hehe Well it is nice to see someone who remembers the old Sushi....the one who said he would never travel to America, would never do business with an American company, would limit his contact with Americans. Now he wraps himself in the American flag and creates positions where the end result always points to YOU wanting to destroy the US. Why? Because after years of searching he's found his position: Calling Americans anti-American. Pretending to love the US while throwing the "anti-American" phrase around is a much better position than his straight-forward anti-American rhetoric that he used for years. It works well on the newbies, but it's nice to see others who know that Sushi simply does not say what he believes because he is a coward. Always was, always will be.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

@tkoind2

The only question that I have is, When are you throwing your hat in the ring? I mean that as a compliment, and not sarcasm. I agree with almost every comment you have written, and we seem to share the same political views, as I feel that candidates/politicians from both parties are FOS, and care about nothing, other than how long they can stay in office, and line their own pockets, at the expense of their constituents. I think that Rick Perry may be the only viable candidate to give Obama any real concern. What has Romney done to make anyone change their mind about him from the last time he tried, and wasn't nominated?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@soudandthefury

Is democracy the best form of government? Looking at the Americans list of candidates on the right and the value of democracy seems dubious -- Bachman? Are you serious? She does not understand the division between church and state, nor does Perry. And Romney? How can anyone take Mormons seriously. Time to return to government run by educated people, the common man does not need to be consulted.

The answer is no. Democracy does not work. Democracy means mob rule and where the minority has no voice because of the majority. The U.S is a Republic, big difference. All politicians know the division between church and state. sep of church & state is not found in the first amendment but rather states that govt cannot establish a official religion while not prohibiting the exercise there of. I also find it ironic that you stated that we need a return to govt run by educated people. Just look at all politicians, they are all educated with college degrees. I think over education is the problem as too much time in academia clouds the mind and dwarfs the individual into a relativistic robot. What is really needed in govt are business men/women, engineers, farmers, physicians and Austrian economist. Not political scientist, lawyers and attorney graduates.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

...he declared that “corporations are people,” drawing ridicule from Democrats.

Funny, considering how many Democrats are lawyers. I don't know the context of the quote, but it sounds taken out of context. Corporations ARE treated as people, to some degree, under our legal system. If you disagree with that, fine, but Romney didn't say anything outrageous.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

SuperLib: "but it's nice to see others who know that Sushi simply does not say what he believes because he is a coward."

So.... do you actually have something to contribute towards the thread instead of just trying to insult other posters? No? Clearly no one forgets superlib, either. :)

yabits, SushiSake, Laguna, and others have provided numerous posts which detail while Romney's calling corporations 'people' or just flat out how wrong the Republicans are perfectly, and it seems all people like sailwind, superlib, and sarge can do is deflect and insult.

Republicans have ruined the US, and it's showing now more than ever. They'll never win in 2012 because they can't unite, and I doubt they even tie their own shoes (nor know how). The Tea Party in particular has proven that not only are they uneducated and outdated, but they are just fools.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Collectively, all losses and gains sum to zero. Your loss is our gain, and your gain is our loss.

False. Some things are zero-sum; some things are not. Land is one entity that is definitely zero-sum, as there is only a finite amount on planet earth. Knowledge is not, as it can be replicated without diminishing itself. Therefore, every time conservatives use a word like all, to describe any position, it reveals their gross lack of understanding.

Bourgeois ideologues will lie to you that economy is a non-Zero-Sum game and that capitalism creates wealth without making others poor.

There is little doubt that capitalism, as practiced by the United States (primarily) throughout its history has driven Africans into extreme misery through slavery (while creating great wealth for slaveholders), and aboriginal peoples into poverty through land theft, wars, and marginalization. The history of the United States has been relatively brief, and most living today will witness the attempt at a major screwing of a wide variety of people by the top 5% who now own big businesses and the government via the two corporatist parties.

The French invented the guillotine to deal with such matters quite efficiently. Other societies have used the general strike. Ordinary people have rolled over and taken it for decades now. The top 5% are counting on a delusional hope that people will continue to roll over. History suggests that is not likely to happen. In fact, the longer that the pressures on a society builds, the greater the reaction will be when it finally comes.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

I live in America and I don't care what happens in America. It has the same problem as the UK: A bunch of spoiled, self-centered, egotistic morons assured of their own superiority.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

smith: "Republicans have ruined the US"

And it's going to take Obama and the Democrats at least 8 years to fix it, right?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

yabits

There is little doubt that capitalism, as practiced by the United States (primarily) throughout its history has driven Africans into extreme misery through slavery

Slavery ended over a hundred years ago. We passed a point in the 1990s where more Africans had immigrated to America than were brought to our shores (sold by their African and Arab captors) in the colonial era.

The French invented the guillotine to deal with such matters quite efficiently.

If it is revolution you are talking about you confirm the now common observation that Conservatives and Libertarians basically want a second American Revolution; people like you (and Laguna) want America to face the kind of horrors unleashed in the French Revolution.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

smithinjapan

yabits, SushiSake, Laguna, and others have provided numerous posts which detail while Romney's calling corporations 'people' or just flat out how wrong the Republicans are perfectly, and it seems all people like sailwind, superlib, and sarge can do is deflect and insult.

No they haven't. Romney is correct. Corporations are people. So are non-profit organizations. Sports franchises are people. Volunteer groups are people. Churches are people. Web forums are people. Not one of the sentimental lefties here can justify their totalitarian urge that free association be abrogated simply because they do not like the outcome, particularly in regards to economic outcomes.

Republicans have ruined the US, and it's showing now more than ever.

You are about as believable as sushisake :)

They'll never win in 2012 because they can't unite,

Heard that one in 2010...

The Tea Party in particular has proven that not only are they uneducated and outdated, but they are just fools.

How, exactly, have they proven this? Because Democrats have failed to create a viable counter-movement?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

smithinjapan

yabits, SushiSake, Laguna, and others have provided numerous posts which detail while Romney's calling corporations 'people' or just flat out how wrong the Republicans are perfectly, and it seems all people like sailwind, superlib, and sarge can do is deflect and insult.

No they haven't. Romney is correct. Corporations are people. So are non-profit organizations. Sports franchises are people. Volunteer groups are people. Churches are people. Web forums are people. Not one of the sentimental lefties here can justify their totalitarian urge that free association be abrogated simply because they do not like the outcome, particularly in regards to economic outcomes.

Republicans have ruined the US, and it's showing now more than ever.

You are about as believable as sushisake :)

They'll never win in 2012 because they can't unite,

Heard that one in 2010...

The Tea Party in particular has proven that not only are they uneducated and outdated, but they are just fools.

How, exactly, have they proven this? Because Democrats have failed to create a viable counter-movement?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

No they haven't. Romney is correct. Corporations are people.

LOL!!!!

Do people downsize their families in order to increase household income? If a corporation is a person, it's an anti-social psychopath.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Yabits, I know you are smarter than this

Do people downsize their families in order to increase household income? If a corporation is a person, it's an anti-social psychopath.

Families and corporations are formed for different purposes by the individuals who create them.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Families and corporations are formed for different purposes by the individuals who create them.

LOL! But, corporations have no inherent right to exist. Formation requires permission.

Once formed, however, it is very instructive to review the behavior of corporate entities to determine the values they act out. Many if not most are anti-social and psychopathic.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

But, corporations have no inherent right to exist. Formation requires permission.

huh?

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Tough one, eh, Breitbart? But hey, you think a corporation is a person, so not surprising.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

smithinjapan

Tough one, eh, Breitbart? But hey, you think a corporation is a person, so not surprising.

No, I don't. Can you read? My statements:

Romney is correct. Corporations are people.

Families and corporations are formed for different purposes by the individuals who create them.

But by all means let's hear your explanation, smith.

What is a corporation?

Romney was CEO of one and started another. He was quite successful with both. I tend to side with the school of thought which says that the definition of a thing is often most accurately provided by those who work with them or in this instance those who work in them.

How many corporations have you headed?

You throw around some very puerile criticism of people who do not share your political beliefs

"Palin is a dolt."

" I doubt they [ Republicans] even tie their own shoes (nor know how). The Tea Party in particular has proven that not only are they uneducated and outdated, but they are just fools."

so I look forward to what I hope will be an adult treatment of my question.

What is a corporation?

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Breitbart - A corporation is an evil organization run by Skynet terminators who lay off people just for fun.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Here's another great Romney quote to chew on: "I'm unemployed too."

Sorry, I don't feel your pain yet. Tell me more, my friend.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

But, corporations have no inherent right to exist. Formation requires permission.

From a very important case heard by the Supreme Court in 1978 -- First National Bank of Boston v Bellotti.

The case concerned whether a corporation could spend money to influence an election regarding matters not connected to its business. One justice's dissent was particularly noteworthy:

Corporate personhood was artificial, not “natural,” the justice observed. A corporation’s rights were not boundless but, rather, limited, and the place of “the right of political expression” on the list of corporate rights was highly questionable. “A state grants to a business corporation the blessings of potentially perpetual life and limited liability to enhance its efficiency as an economic entity,” the dissenting opinion continued. “It might reasonably be concluded that those properties, so beneficial in the economic sphere, pose special dangers in the political sphere … Indeed, the states might reasonably fear that the corporation would use its economic power to obtain further benefits beyond those already bestowed.”

Noting that most states, along with the federal government, had placed limits on the ability of corporations to participate in politics, the dissenting justice concluded: “The judgment of such a broad consensus of governmental bodies expressed over a period of many decades is entitled to considerable deference from this Court.”

The dissenting justice: William Rehnquist.

What a difference a few decades make to the conservatives who have now sold out their values to corporate paymasters.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites