Ah, Mr. Rude and Insulting has returned!

I was worried you'd given it up for your blood pressure.

The thought that money from Corporate or other huge, organized groups like unions isnt already the primary source of influence over elections is laughable. Should we prevent George Soros from pouring hundreds of millions of his Wall Street dollars into Democratic campaigns via moveon.org and other shady groups he funds? That one single individual who happens to be a liberal billionaire has not only the funds but no fear of political retribution if his side loses. Should we rein him in as well because he certainly has more influence than a regular citizen?

The idea that this will suddenly make politics dirty and politicians whores seems to forget that we have already been there for quite sometime now.

A couple days ago you said the Brown election was 'a local thing' and now it's Wall Street? :zz:

and I do agree that 'anti-Wall Street' people thinking this is a good thing is crazy. I am pro-Wall Street and in a much broader sense pro-Capitalism so I am thrilled with the Supreme Court's decision. Just as those who are anti-Wall Street and anti-Capitalism would be against. This obviously is why Obama and people like you have come out so strongly against.

Dell, I have never said the Brown election was a local thing. And I have already corrected your mistake once. Why do you repeat it? I said I thought the Brown election was about the economy and Washington, and more than once.

Well, I am unabashedly pro-capitalism, make enough money off Wall Street, and being firmly against this decision has nothing at all to do with who you voted for in the last election, in my opinion. And, I've not seen anybody who is against this opinion say they are anti-business or anti-Wall Street ???

You made an assumptive jump there I just can't follow.

Lets face the facts, liberals are aghast at this decision because one of their primary tactics is to beat up on the evil, rich corporations. Now they wont be as willing to use class warfare and populism for fear of retribution. It may actually force them to deal with the issues on which they often have very tenuous positions. What they should be more worried about is who fills the money vacuum between when George Soros dies and GBBob becomes a billionaire?

Who exactly says they are anti-business? Other than maybe Scuds?

Dell did, above. I don't share his assumption.

I dont understand how educated people can be "pro or anti" Wall Street?

Either do I.

no you said, "But the folks in Mass are saying it was all just local politics, she wasn't liked nor endorsed by the Dem party in Mass, the machine didn't rev up the call centers for her, etc."

So I guess I'm correcting your correction. :D

The Constitution is a biased piece of Republican Love Letter. The Electoral College is unfair to many citizens of this country. If the 26 least populated states voted as a bloc, they would control the U.S. Senate with only 17% of the country’s population. Now this piece of trash is used to justify allowing companies to determine who gets to vote on laws that involve their interests. This is the garbage your loyalty lies with? Changing it requires 2/3 of both houses of Congress, and, then, 3/4 of the state legislatures. That means any bias within has to be gotten rid of with the help of the same people who are being advantaged (won't happen.) It's biased garbage, and that's why Republicans have such a hard-on love for it. They recognize the advantage within. You couldn't be more blatantly unfair than to allow 33% of the population only have an 8% say in something.

:cool:

yes, my loyalty lies with the country formed by our founding fathers, including that 'piece of crap' constitution that's been used as the basis for our laws. i'm assuming you agree with a fair amount of them. but not all of them, so when it doesn't suit your purpose i guess it becomes a piece of crap to you. sorry to hear that. your problem, not mine.

and i do find it interesting that in three pages of thread, no one has said anything about big unions, who also benefit from this ruling. the washington post had a very good article about the ruling that i just read.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...ref%3Dobinsite

Uh, no. "Folks in Mass" are not me, Dell :D We were talking about what people were saying about why the vote went the way it did. All I did was mention that, and a couple other things - right?

I have said I think it's jobs, economy. More than once. Go find those posts.

So - stop saying "I say" that the Brown election is a local thing. That's what some Dem organizers in Mass. said. Not me!

c'mon no one in Mass was saying that. You and Dem organizers were hoping that's what they were saying. Do you know a large portion voted for Brown because they don't want Obama's Health Care crap? Contrary to what Dem Organizers said this had very little to do with local politics.

I say again that the founding fathers fkd it up. It's a piece of Republican trash. Anyone can see that 17% of the population having half the votes in the senate is an example of how much a piece of Republican Love Letter it is. Your love for it is a prime example of why you should be Republican. Anyone else who thinks this (17% of the citizens should be able to control the senate) should also be Republican, because it's totally biased towards the Republican Party.

now only if everyone on here was as honest as you! F'd up but none the less honest like 60 mins. tonight!