The Double Edged Sword of Term Limits

User avatar
SuburbanFarmer
Posts: 25055
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 6:50 am
Location: Ohio

Re: The Double Edged Sword of Term Limits

Post by SuburbanFarmer » Mon Nov 30, 2020 9:45 am

clubgop wrote:
Mon Nov 30, 2020 9:34 am
SuburbanFarmer wrote:
Mon Nov 30, 2020 8:54 am
clubgop wrote:
Mon Nov 30, 2020 8:51 am


Not unless you shred the 1st amendment.
Are corporations people?
Is the press?
Individual members of the press, yes. Not in groups.
SJWs are a natural consequence of corporatism.

Formerly GrumpyCatFace

https://youtu.be/CYbT8-rSqo0

User avatar
clubgop
Posts: 7978
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 5:47 pm

Re: The Double Edged Sword of Term Limits

Post by clubgop » Mon Nov 30, 2020 9:47 am

SuburbanFarmer wrote:
Mon Nov 30, 2020 9:45 am
clubgop wrote:
Mon Nov 30, 2020 9:34 am
SuburbanFarmer wrote:
Mon Nov 30, 2020 8:54 am


Are corporations people?
Is the press?
Individual members of the press, yes. Not in groups.
They are all corporations, even the small independent ones incorporate to protect themselves from liability. Mike Bloomberg gets unlimited speech because he owns a network with his name on it, and owns every journalist in his employ or wants to keep options open, but you want to shred the entire 1st amendment because Hobby Lobby wants to run a 30 second ad.
Last edited by clubgop on Mon Nov 30, 2020 9:53 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
The Conservative
Posts: 14713
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 9:43 am

Re: The Double Edged Sword of Term Limits

Post by The Conservative » Mon Nov 30, 2020 9:50 am

Xenophon wrote:
Mon Nov 30, 2020 9:04 am
Ugh. Clubby's right. If you restrict campaign donations to a certain amount, it could be seen as a 1st amendment violation because corporations are considered legal persons.

Taking away that right from corporations would prevent business owners from running their business as they see fit. I sympathize with that point of view.

All of this crap makes my head hurt. Voting is the gayest thing you can do with your pants on.

Image
They were restricted in the past, we would be going back to how it was.
#NotOneRedCent

User avatar
clubgop
Posts: 7978
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 5:47 pm

Re: The Double Edged Sword of Term Limits

Post by clubgop » Mon Nov 30, 2020 10:00 am

The Conservative wrote:
Mon Nov 30, 2020 9:50 am
Xenophon wrote:
Mon Nov 30, 2020 9:04 am
Ugh. Clubby's right. If you restrict campaign donations to a certain amount, it could be seen as a 1st amendment violation because corporations are considered legal persons.

Taking away that right from corporations would prevent business owners from running their business as they see fit. I sympathize with that point of view.

All of this crap makes my head hurt. Voting is the gayest thing you can do with your pants on.

Image
They were restricted in the past, we would be going back to how it was.
So independent dark money. Same as it ever was. You play accounting games with people that have a message and big bank balances, the message is going to get out. Why drive this shit underground? Have it in your face and deal with it head on. Dirty dick wants the fantasy of sullying an untouched virgin but there aren't any they are all whores at least this way I know who is paying.

User avatar
SuburbanFarmer
Posts: 25055
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 6:50 am
Location: Ohio

Re: The Double Edged Sword of Term Limits

Post by SuburbanFarmer » Mon Nov 30, 2020 10:19 am

clubgop wrote:
Mon Nov 30, 2020 9:47 am
SuburbanFarmer wrote:
Mon Nov 30, 2020 9:45 am
clubgop wrote:
Mon Nov 30, 2020 9:34 am


Is the press?
Individual members of the press, yes. Not in groups.
They are all corporations, even the small independent ones incorporate to protect themselves from liability. Mike Bloomberg gets unlimited speech because he owns a network with his name on it, and owns every journalist in his employ or wants to keep options open, but you want to shred the entire 1st amendment because Hobby Lobby wants to run a 30 second ad.
Running ads also has nothing to do with political payoffs. Methinks thou dost protest too much.
SJWs are a natural consequence of corporatism.

Formerly GrumpyCatFace

https://youtu.be/CYbT8-rSqo0

User avatar
SuburbanFarmer
Posts: 25055
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 6:50 am
Location: Ohio

Re: The Double Edged Sword of Term Limits

Post by SuburbanFarmer » Mon Nov 30, 2020 10:19 am

clubgop wrote:
Mon Nov 30, 2020 10:00 am
The Conservative wrote:
Mon Nov 30, 2020 9:50 am
Xenophon wrote:
Mon Nov 30, 2020 9:04 am
Ugh. Clubby's right. If you restrict campaign donations to a certain amount, it could be seen as a 1st amendment violation because corporations are considered legal persons.

Taking away that right from corporations would prevent business owners from running their business as they see fit. I sympathize with that point of view.

All of this crap makes my head hurt. Voting is the gayest thing you can do with your pants on.

Image
They were restricted in the past, we would be going back to how it was.
So independent dark money. Same as it ever was. You play accounting games with people that have a message and big bank balances, the message is going to get out. Why drive this shit underground? Have it in your face and deal with it head on. Dirty dick wants the fantasy of sullying an untouched virgin but there aren't any they are all whores at least this way I know who is paying.
I’d rather see Bloomberg paying out of his own pocket, than leveraging his entire corporation to do it.
SJWs are a natural consequence of corporatism.

Formerly GrumpyCatFace

https://youtu.be/CYbT8-rSqo0

User avatar
clubgop
Posts: 7978
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 5:47 pm

Re: The Double Edged Sword of Term Limits

Post by clubgop » Mon Nov 30, 2020 10:28 am

SuburbanFarmer wrote:
Mon Nov 30, 2020 10:19 am
clubgop wrote:
Mon Nov 30, 2020 9:47 am
SuburbanFarmer wrote:
Mon Nov 30, 2020 9:45 am


Individual members of the press, yes. Not in groups.
They are all corporations, even the small independent ones incorporate to protect themselves from liability. Mike Bloomberg gets unlimited speech because he owns a network with his name on it, and owns every journalist in his employ or wants to keep options open, but you want to shred the entire 1st amendment because Hobby Lobby wants to run a 30 second ad.
Running ads also has nothing to do with political payoffs. Methinks thou dost protest too much.
What do "political payoffs" have to do with the 1st amendment be it from corporations or individuals methinkd thou dost protest too much.

User avatar
clubgop
Posts: 7978
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 5:47 pm

Re: The Double Edged Sword of Term Limits

Post by clubgop » Mon Nov 30, 2020 10:38 am

SuburbanFarmer wrote:
Mon Nov 30, 2020 10:19 am
clubgop wrote:
Mon Nov 30, 2020 10:00 am
The Conservative wrote:
Mon Nov 30, 2020 9:50 am


They were restricted in the past, we would be going back to how it was.
So independent dark money. Same as it ever was. You play accounting games with people that have a message and big bank balances, the message is going to get out. Why drive this shit underground? Have it in your face and deal with it head on. Dirty dick wants the fantasy of sullying an untouched virgin but there aren't any they are all whores at least this way I know who is paying.
I’d rather see Bloomberg paying out of his own pocket, than leveraging his entire corporation to do it.
He is doing both. What's the difference?

We need Campaign Finance reform now!- Bloomberg News

Mike Bloomberg spend millions for "Got out the vote efforts" - Bloomberg News

"Coporations aren't people and don't have any rights."

"When Trump attacks CNN ( a coporation] he is threatening a free press."

Same people.

User avatar
Hanarchy Montanarchy
Posts: 5991
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2016 1:54 am

Re: The Double Edged Sword of Term Limits

Post by Hanarchy Montanarchy » Mon Nov 30, 2020 10:43 am

Politicians are just the sales team for political parties.

Not everyone has the skills or temperament to be a salesman - so running for office probably isn't the best avenue of political engagement for everyone. There are still plenty of ways to get into the game, but people would rather just complain about not having access to the high-profile job of "Candidate."

Campaign finance reform won't change that.
HAIL!

Her needs America so they won't just take his shit away like in some pussy non gun totting countries can happen.
-Hwen

User avatar
Xenophon
Posts: 2713
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 6:41 am

Re: The Double Edged Sword of Term Limits

Post by Xenophon » Mon Nov 30, 2020 10:48 am

SuburbanFarmer wrote:
Mon Nov 30, 2020 9:17 am
Xenophon wrote:
Mon Nov 30, 2020 9:04 am
Ugh. Clubby's right. If you restrict campaign donations to a certain amount, it could be seen as a 1st amendment violation because corporations are considered legal persons.

Taking away that right from corporations would prevent business owners from running their business as they see fit. I sympathize with that point of view.

All of this crap makes my head hurt. Voting is the gayest thing you can do with your pants on.

Image
What does ‘running a business’ have to do with political donations? Unless we’re enshrining political payoffs (corruption) as a ‘fundamental right’?
Because if you take away the corporation's first amendment rights, not only would they not be able to donate to political parties over a certain amount, but they could also get in trouble for running their business in a certain way, i.e. Catholic hospital not performing abortions.

They'd have to somehow find a way to remove personhood from corporations without damaging the 1st amendment.