AnimeSuki Forums

Register Forum Rules FAQ Members List Social Groups Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Go Back   AnimeSuki Forum > General > General Chat

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2010-01-21, 22:19   Link #5561
james0246
Senior Member
*Moderator
 
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: East Cupcake
^Corporations can support whomever they wish...they just can't give their candidate unlimited funds...or at least they couldn't....

Besides, what happens if the corporation is actually owned by non-Americans? There are various corporations that are stationed in America that are actually owned by foreign businesses. Now, those foreign business owners (even if directed by an American shareholder) can use any amount of money they wish to help which ever candidate they desire...

In the end, the SC decision just seems so unnecessary...
james0246 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-01-21, 22:33   Link #5562
mg1942
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
problem here is that in a 5-4 decision, the SC determined what was constitutional and what was not. That's the criteria.

It's not a matter of "what was at stake". It's a matter of what is or is not constitutional.
mg1942 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-01-21, 22:35   Link #5563
MeoTwister5
Komrades of Kitamura Kou
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Where I can learn to be lonely.
Age: 29
I imagine that in future American elections with this ruling, candidates will be prioritizing corporate meeting rooms rather than public support rallies.
MeoTwister5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-01-21, 22:59   Link #5564
Autumn Demon
~
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Ithaca, NY
Age: 25
The first amendment shouldn't, and doesn't, solely apply to individuals. A newspaper is a company and they've been endorsing candidates forever.

It's fair to assume the workers in a coal company would be opposed to legislation banning coal mining. So if lawmakers are campaigning to ban coal mining, coal companies should be able to spend money on the campaign in protest.

Just as civil liberties NGOs should be able to spend money on campaigns to support human rights.
Autumn Demon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-01-22, 00:19   Link #5565
justinstrife
Queen Sheryl's Protector
 
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: John Galt Railroad
Age: 34
Send a message via AIM to justinstrife Send a message via Skype™ to justinstrife
This is from a Moderator on a political section of the corvetteforum I'm a member of. He is extremely intelligent when it comes to U.S. Political matters and far more experienced with higher credentials than I am about this topic. He's also a Libertarian and doesn't belong to either major political party.

Spoiler:


I agree with him in a lot of ways, but I still feel uneasy. I don't really know where I stand on this issue.
justinstrife is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-01-22, 00:27   Link #5566
Vexx
Obey the Darkly Cute ...
*Author
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: On the whole, I'd rather be in Kyoto ...
Age: 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by mg1942 View Post
Corporations SHOULD be able to defend themselves politically - The government drums up support for taxes / regulations, they should be able to support whomever they wish. Corporations also have a built-in set of checks and balances - stockholders and consumers, both can vote with their feet in reaction
So... if a US corporation that is majority held by foreign interests influences an election... this is a Good Idea?

We've already seen the only way shareholders can usually say anything is to sell/buy. They're pretty much herded by Boards of Directors.

Modern multi-level corporations simply buy their competition... try boycotting a corporation and you'll usually find the alternatives are owned by the same corporation.

Quote:
A corporation can spend $1 trillion on a candidate, and it will increase the number of votes that anyone in that corporation can cast by exactly 0.
There is an established direct correlation between money spent and the electoral results... its about inundating the airwaves with FUD and misinformation. And frankly... the George Soros types bother me as much as the megacorps.
Vexx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-01-22, 00:37   Link #5567
justinstrife
Queen Sheryl's Protector
 
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: John Galt Railroad
Age: 34
Send a message via AIM to justinstrife Send a message via Skype™ to justinstrife
As I said at the end of my post, I'm still uncertain where I stand on this. In the end though, we still have to abide by the Constitution. And if the Supreme Court rules this way, there isn't much you can do without a Constitutional Amendment. Which is to say, rather difficult to pass.
justinstrife is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-01-22, 00:42   Link #5568
Xellos-_^
Married
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: R'lyeh
Age: 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vexx View Post
So... if a US corporation that is majority held by foreign interests influences an election... this is a Good Idea?
foreign countries already hire platoons of lobbyist and PR people in the US to influence congress
__________________
Xellos-_^ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-01-22, 00:52   Link #5569
mg1942
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xellos-_^ View Post
foreign countries already hire platoons of lobbyist and PR people in the US to influence congress
my guess is Israel and PRC are @ the top of the list
mg1942 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-01-22, 00:58   Link #5570
justinstrife
Queen Sheryl's Protector
 
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: John Galt Railroad
Age: 34
Send a message via AIM to justinstrife Send a message via Skype™ to justinstrife
Quote:
Originally Posted by mg1942 View Post
my guess is Israel and PRC are @ the top of the list
I highly doubt that Israel would be at the top of the list.
justinstrife is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-01-22, 00:59   Link #5571
Nosauz
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Age: 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by Autumn Demon View Post
The first amendment shouldn't, and doesn't, solely apply to individuals. A newspaper is a company and they've been endorsing candidates forever.

It's fair to assume the workers in a coal company would be opposed to legislation banning coal mining. So if lawmakers are campaigning to ban coal mining, coal companies should be able to spend money on the campaign in protest.

Just as civil liberties NGOs should be able to spend money on campaigns to support human rights.
Except human rights are fundamentally given to humans, whereas political clout in corporate matters aren't, unless your saying that human rights are not fundamental rights at all.

@justinstrife... Actually the israel lobby is one of the top contributors to American politician, in fact most policies that benefit Israel are the fundamental reasons why arab's and the west have such a strained relationship.
Nosauz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-01-22, 01:01   Link #5572
Autumn Demon
~
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Ithaca, NY
Age: 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vexx View Post
So... if a US corporation that is majority held by foreign interests influences an election... this is a Good Idea?
As someone who isn't a nationalist, I see nothing wrong with this. What's so bad about foreigners?

I would love it if the Afghan and Iraqi people influenced elections in America actually.
Autumn Demon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-01-22, 01:03   Link #5573
Vexx
Obey the Darkly Cute ...
*Author
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: On the whole, I'd rather be in Kyoto ...
Age: 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by justinstrife View Post
As I said at the end of my post, I'm still uncertain where I stand on this. In the end though, we still have to abide by the Constitution. And if the Supreme Court rules this way, there isn't much you can do without a Constitutional Amendment. Which is to say, rather difficult to pass.
Agreed there.... problem is I think the majority subverted the intent, stare decisis, and basically toasted whatever was left of this 200+ year experiment. All because they decided give an undying, artificial entity with sociopathic traits the status of personhood. Undying corporate overlords.... whee.
Vexx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-01-22, 01:06   Link #5574
Nosauz
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Age: 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by mg1942 View Post
problem here is that in a 5-4 decision, the SC determined what was constitutional and what was not. That's the criteria.

It's not a matter of "what was at stake". It's a matter of what is or is not constitutional.
5-4 split decision is exactly a case where there is question of legality and intention of the constitution whereas in Brown v Board it was 9-0 a definitive yea to the end of segregation. Clearly there was a discussion among the justices so to say that it's cut and dry is just ridiculous.
Nosauz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-01-22, 01:29   Link #5575
mg1942
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by justinstrife View Post
I highly doubt that Israel would be at the top of the list.
i guess you're not familiar with the likes of AIPAC...
mg1942 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-01-22, 01:57   Link #5576
justinstrife
Queen Sheryl's Protector
 
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: John Galt Railroad
Age: 34
Send a message via AIM to justinstrife Send a message via Skype™ to justinstrife
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nosauz View Post
Except human rights are fundamentally given to humans, whereas political clout in corporate matters aren't, unless your saying that human rights are not fundamental rights at all.

@justinstrife... Actually the israel lobby is one of the top contributors to American politician, in fact most policies that benefit Israel are the fundamental reasons why arab's and the west have such a strained relationship.
I thought the reason arabs hate the West is because we don't think like them?

Can't say I've seen any evidence that Israel manipulates this country enough to be #1. We supply billions to arab countries in foreign aid just as we do to Israel and have even supplied others with military hardware. Israel didn't want us in Iraq, yet we went in anyway.
justinstrife is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-01-22, 02:35   Link #5577
Vexx
Obey the Darkly Cute ...
*Author
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: On the whole, I'd rather be in Kyoto ...
Age: 56
The usual "conspiracy" theory is that the underlying reason for the Iraq invasion was to create our own permanent occupation force and bases there. This would take the heat off of Saudi Arabia by eliminating our bases there... and reduce our dependence on Israel as a deployment zone. The oil field control redistribution was gravy for Cheney's buddies.

Meh, whatever, YMMV
Vexx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-01-22, 03:43   Link #5578
karthak
Baruk Khazad
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: finland
Here's what a lobbyist has to say:
We have got a million we can spend advertising for you or against you — whichever one you want,’ ” a lobbyist can tell lawmakers, said Lawrence M. Noble, a lawyer at Skadden Arps in Washington and former general counsel of the Federal Election Commission.http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/22/us...donate.html?hp

In other words, any lawmaker who votes against the corporations interests will receive the threat that unless they change their opinion, their opponents will get tons of money for their campaigns.
karthak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-01-22, 04:03   Link #5579
Jinto
Asuki-tan Kairin ↓
 
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Fürth (GER)
Age: 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by justinstrife View Post
I thought the reason arabs hate the West is because we don't think like them?

Can't say I've seen any evidence that Israel manipulates this country enough to be #1. We supply billions to arab countries in foreign aid just as we do to Israel and have even supplied others with military hardware. Israel didn't want us in Iraq, yet we went in anyway.
I'ld say it is not so important who you supply with military equipement or give foreign aid to (which is for most countries - includes the USA - it is not a noble act of friendship towards these countries but a means to keep them on a short leash politically... there is nothing better then economical dependency... thats the new way of colonization).
More important is who has influence on your local media. Israel's lobby groups are far more present in e.g. Germany or the USA then chinese or other national lobby groups. In the case of Israel this coincides with general jewish interests (which are often hard to tell apart). Religion seems to be a very strong factor in general, considering there are other, even stronger christian lobbies in the USA.
Which is not unsurprising since (warning sarcasm), modern feudalism doesn't work without a lot of idiots who follow a religion blindly. So, one could assume a certain political interest here, coming from the power elites (those who are in power).
Media is btw. the complementing part for religion. If both are combined in a clever way, the power elites can rule over the stupid masses by keeping them misinformed. That is the way, the whole western world opperates.
No major politician can be free of the influence of lobbying (be it directly or indirectly). If I was sracastic I'ld say: typically voting is just to keep the masses entertaint and make them believe they have some power to decide things.
However, in the end you will always get what the big influential lobbies want (whether they have much money or not is not so important... but admittedly lobbying without a substantial amount of money does not really work - except you have someone co-lobbying who has much money or the same interests.. at least partially).
Anyway... for lobbying in foreign countries, there exists a best practice if you lack economic power that utilizes religious matters. Now that is a weak point of China thus their lobbying activities are more based on economic pressure. When I said economical dependency is a way to modern colonialization, then this applies only for situations where a strong economical power is faced with weak economic powers. If the powers are equally strong, it is more like either an economic symbiosis or an economic cold war (or both of them in varying degrees, and according to national interest).

(I need to end this at this point... I have to go to work)
Jinto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-01-22, 09:40   Link #5580
Nosauz
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Age: 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by justinstrife View Post
I thought the reason arabs hate the West is because we don't think like them?

Can't say I've seen any evidence that Israel manipulates this country enough to be #1. We supply billions to arab countries in foreign aid just as we do to Israel and have even supplied others with military hardware. Israel didn't want us in Iraq, yet we went in anyway.
AIPAC is just one of the most powerful lobbies in washington, and note that many policies that involve israel have little to no benefit to the United States yet the US is willing to move heaven and earth for. Not to mention the amount of technology and intel we've shared with Mosad and the Israeli government. Aid is one thing, but considering how the US has helped deflect any blame from Israel is a reason why many arabs don't trust Americans. Just look, the invasion in lebanon was a breach of international law, and yet the united states backed israel, these big situtations create a hypocrisy which no rational human could accept, and let's not forget the current lack of desettlement in the gaza strip.
Nosauz is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
current affairs, discussion, international, news

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 23:22.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
We use Silk.