kelpdiver 2 #226 August 21, 2012 QuoteQuote The "proper" course of action is to follow the rules as set forth IN the Constitution first. Strange rulings which declair companies have the same rights as citizens are not supportable by that standard. The supreme court thinks it is supportable. That is the point, they are in charge of that interpretation. If the constitution isn't being interpreted by the supreme court in the way that people think it should, then that is exactly the proper role of an amendment. I've yet to see a corporation act on its own. Every one I have seen has people acting for it. Makes me think about evil guns, planning rampages. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 3 #227 August 21, 2012 I've yet to see a corporation jailed or given the death penalty. Corporations are not people.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #228 August 21, 2012 QuoteI've yet to see a corporation jailed or given the death penalty. Corporations are not people. Ma Bell got chopped into pieces...worse than any method of execution ever permitted. Most of Enron's leadership was jailed. What was the question, again? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 3 #229 August 21, 2012 QuoteMa Bell got chopped into pieces...worse than any method of execution ever permitted. How sad is it you'd think this?quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sundevil777 93 #230 August 21, 2012 QuoteI've yet to see a corporation jailed or given the death penalty. Corporations are not people. The supreme court has interpreted the constitution to say that the right to voice an opinion by supporting a political candidate with money is part of the right of free speech. They also saw no reason that groups should get less free speech rights than individuals. If people don't like that interpretation, then the best way to remedy that is to propose an amendment to the constitution. Not doing that is kinda admitting that the public would not support that position.People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,400 #231 August 21, 2012 >Ma Bell got chopped into pieces...worse than any method of execution ever permitted. So hanging a woman isn't as bad as separating her from her friends? Odd take on it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #232 August 21, 2012 Quote>Ma Bell got chopped into pieces...worse than any method of execution ever permitted. So hanging a woman isn't as bad as separating her from her friends? Odd take on it. she was chopped into 8 different pieces. Separated from herself, not her friends. Still waiting on response to Enron, guys. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #233 August 21, 2012 QuoteQuoteI've yet to see a corporation jailed or given the death penalty. Corporations are not people. The supreme court has interpreted the constitution to say that the right to voice an opinion by supporting a political candidate with money is part of the right of free speech. They also saw no reason that groups should get less free speech rights than individuals. If people don't like that interpretation, then the best way to remedy that is to propose an amendment to the constitution. Not doing that is kinda admitting that the public would not support that position. Somehow I suspect they would word it vastly differently than your rather straightforward (and accurate) description. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,400 #234 August 21, 2012 >she was chopped into 8 different pieces. That would kill her; no part would survive. Ma Bell was just reorganized into many smaller companies. It was not "killed." (But it sure sounds dramatic when you put it that way.) Corporations are not people. They do not have the same standing before the law. Breaking a large corporation into two smaller corporations does not "kill" either one. There are no Miranda rights for a corporation because you can't arrest one, and a corporation can't make a phone call from prison because you can't jail a corporation. There are no debates about capital punishment when it comes to corporations despite your colorful analogy. However, the PEOPLE who make up a corporation, including the CEO, have the same rights everyone else does. And a corporation can legally enter into contracts as a single entity. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #235 August 22, 2012 Quote>she was chopped into 8 different pieces. That would kill her; no part would survive. Ma Bell was just reorganized into many smaller companies. It was not "killed." (But it sure sounds dramatic when you put it that way.) The company ceased to exist. It is dead. Still is. I do accept your alternative as reasonable, but corporations can and have been killed by our government. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sundevil777 93 #236 August 22, 2012 Just because corporations have the same free speech right as individuals doesn't mean that they were saying that corporations are the same as people in for all purposes/considerations. Debating the analogies of corporations are people has no value to the discussion.People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shotgun 1 #237 October 12, 2012 Quote Quote Quote I can't wait for Ryan and Biden to have a debate. October 11, Kentucky. I am looking forward to this too, but probably not for the right reason. Perv. Joe was the sexiest, in a psychotic sort of way. (Were they blowing laughing gas on him through the air vents???) Paul's "Eddie Munster" hair wasn't doing it for me. Maybe he should have done the debate with his shirt off. Yes, I am a one-issue voter. That issue being who has the hottest VP. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Erroll 49 #238 October 12, 2012 Quote ..Maybe he should have done the debate with his shirt off. That's just malarkey! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
