Top Comments
All Comments (24)
-
i know the owners of the company
-
nice video
-
@whoo689 How the hell can a "respected" news organization like CBS get the CU decision so damn wrong? Surely Bob Schieffer realizes that that Murray Hill bullshit is just satire from some left-wingers, right? No corporation is going to ADMIT, even if it were true or possible, that they wanna bribe Congress into doing their bidding or get Congress to do things that only benefit them. They'd lose in a landslide.
-
@whoo689 Besides, how many corporate leaders have YOU talked to that actually said, "We gave this money to Obama, and now we bribed him into doing our bidding." With the amount of PACs and interest groups on EVERY position of an issue, NO ONE would have to be beholden to one position simply for donations! It's unrealistic. It makes no sense. Besides, didn't anyone tell you correlation is not causation? People court the interests they LIKE in elections, not get bribed by them.
-
@whoo689 And corporations ALWAYS try to get whoever is in power, even if the party is less pro-business than the guys they'd prefer, to help them out. Sometimes corporations even lobby FOR regulation, at least when the regulation will favor the bigger companies and screw over smaller companies in a certain industry. Or when the legislation gives them subsidies or mandates for people to buy their products.
Corporations and America- it's a lot more complex than Nader has told you.
-
@whoo689 They have, as of yet, presented no evidence that bosses are walking up to their employees saying "Hey, Dan. How about contributing to Obama?" or even blackmailing them into doing it. And corporate PACs can only give 5 grand per candidate. The Left (and the Right) NEED to fucking educate themselves on campaign finance law before they open their mouths and say such nonsense. Besides, contributors see their donations as INVESTMENTS. Oftentimes corporations give to BOTH parties.
-
The amount of corporate "influence" on elections and Congress is overstated. Progressives assume it because they see that "such-and-such corporation is registered as having given this much to candidate A"; however, that's what is called BUNDLING. Bundlers are just regular individuals working by themselves or with a certain organization to raise money for their candidate. They BUNDLE the contributions from other individuals into one lump sum and give it to the candidate.
-
I'm gonna have to stop you right there, Bob. Corporations DO NOT yet have the right to fund federal political campaigns! They haven't had that right since 1907 and probably never will. All the decision said is that they can fund ADVERTISING for political issues. Of course, this implies that corporations think it's a good investment to spend millions on political ads when there are far better ways to use that money.
Why can't anyone actually read the decision before they bash it?
-
General Electric for Governor!!!
-
Murry Hill for President!
The democratic & republican parties are both incorporated. Every candidate who proclaims they are dem or rep openly states they only represent that corp and not the people.
Every city, county, and state is incorporated, including the federal government.
It's been this way for decades, stop pretending it now upsets you.
Why not let corps own you openly?
You've supported them you whole life anyway.
Why shouldn't they have the right to buy and sell you?
yeah... go McDonalds 2012!... god damnit you fuckers are crazy
BeatingNgSource 1 year ago 8
The dangerously logical end-run of capitalism: American democratic institutions suffering a coup by corporations themselves.
Asiablue 1 year ago 6