Pelosi put her Marx on

[off2bed]

She wants to repeal the 1st Amendment and replace it with one that allows the government to abridge the free speech rights of the evil capitalist bourgeoisie.

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/pelosi-amend-first-amendment

To liberals, illegal aliens have more rights than corporations.

 

[bronzeage]

She wants to repeal the 1st Amendment and replace it with one that allows the government to abridge the free speech rights of the evil capitalist bourgeoisie.

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/pelosi-amend-first-amendment

To liberals, illegal aliens have more rights than corporations.

If an illegal alien owned stock in a corporation, would that give them the same rights as a corporation?

 

[Sean Renaud]

Good job Pelosi. Fight on.

 

[Derpman]

She wants to derp!

DERP!

 

[busybody..]

She wants to repeal the 1st Amendment and replace it with one that allows the government to abridge the free speech rights of the evil capitalist bourgeoisie.

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/pelosi-amend-first-amendment

To liberals, illegal aliens have more rights than corporations.

there is no such thing as an ILLEGAL PERSON

racist

 

[unregistered]

 

[KingOrfeo]

Pelosi put her Marx on

Is this going to be your -- or CNS' -- standard response, from now on, to anybody who suggests amending the Constitution to reverse or get around Citizens United?*

If so, it will always be a very dishonest response.

Dishonest because, if our "republic" or "democracy" works in such a way that it is possible for the rich or the corporations to influence the outcome of elections by spending large amounts of money, you don't need to be any kind of Marxist to have some problems with that, and all of you lying assholes know it. Thomas Jefferson would have had a problem with that. Even Alexander Hamilton might have, avowed elitist though he was. Karl Marx . . . probably would not have regarded election law as a topic worthy of serious attention anyway.




* As opposed to the RW response to any SCOTUS decision of constitutional interpretation that they don't like; which is, more often than not, to deny that the SCOTUS has any legitimate authority to make it; or, sometimes, even to deny that the Constitution needs or bears "interpreting" anyway.

 

[cjh]

What sort of rights against self incrimination do corporations possess under the Fifth Amendment?

 

[unregistered]

 

[Sean Renaud]

None according to the left despite they are a group of individuals.

This is the problem. They are a group of individuals. Not an individual. There is a difference.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

If an illegal alien owned stock in a corporation, would that give them the same rights as a corporation?

Lots of illegal aliens own stock in corporations, and they can vote in the elections...



What the hell does that have to do with anything?

 

[semen4her]

This is the problem. They are a group of individuals. Not an individual. There is a difference.

Not to a derper.

 

[cjh]

None according to the left despite they are a group of individuals.

Liberals like Rehnquist and O'Connor?

Hey! Why do neither private physicians nor their patients have First Amendment rights?

 

[unregistered]

 

[unregistered]

 

[KingOrfeo]

Liberals like Rehnquist and O'Connor?

Hey! Why do neither private physicians nor their patients have First Amendment rights?

Because in that setting, the only right that matters is the right to bare arms! [rimshot]

 

[Sean Renaud]

So you're going to maintain that if two people incorporate they forfeit their constitutional rights?

Is speech mandated by the government, free speech?

Nobody is saying that. We are saying that if two people incorporate two people have two voices as two individuals. Not on incoporated voice speaking with the dollars of their investors who invest in their business sense not their political ideas.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Nobody is saying that. We are saying that if two people incorporate two people have two voices as two individuals. Not on incoporated voice speaking with the dollars of their investors who invest in their business sense not their political ideas.

But if two people incorporate, they are taxed as one person.

If you are taxed you should have as much say as the large mass of people who are not.

One of those two groups create wealth, the other demands its largess as a right of being a citizen...

 

[cjh]

So you're going to maintain that if two people incorporate they forfeit their constitutional rights?

Is speech mandated by the government, free speech?

http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/487/99/

What speech is mandated by the government?

 

[unregistered]

 

[Sean Renaud]

Who are you to say anything about it? It's a private corporation, and unless you own stock and can vote you have no say in the direction, or the speech of the corporation.

It's still not an individual. Which is the point. Can we treat companies as individuals when something goes wrong?

 

[KingOrfeo]

It's still not an individual. Which is the point. Can we treat companies as individuals when something goes wrong?

Well, certainly a corporation, as an individual, can be sued for negligence or whatever. But all those actual individuals marching under the paper dragon, all the managers and workers and investors who make up the corporation, usually cannot be sued, because that is the point of having a limited liability corporation -- an investor's liability being limited in law to the extent of his/her investment. Before the limited liability corporation was invented in the early 19th Century, you might invest ten pounds/dollars in a business venture and, when it failed, find yourself legally on the hook for a debt ten times your investment. And this was also a time when they had debtors' prisons, so . . .

Of course, nowadays most corporations worth talking about are not only of limited-liability form, but publicly traded. If you play the market, you might buy and sell a given share of the same company several times a day; certainly your "ownership" is entirely separated from management or control; do you bear any moral responsibility for the things that company does?

 

[Sean Renaud]

I know that. Nobody goes to jail or anything like that though. There isn't a lot in the way of reprocussions other than at worst the company going under.

 

[unregistered]

 

[unregistered]