Comments on: Is It Just Corporate Free Speech?

By: beenz07

beenz07 — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 20:05:34 +0000

but at the same time a corporation is run by people who do control the money…so in reality what’s the difference? It makes sense for the NRA to fund advertising before an election if they have legitimate concerns about an uninformed constituency electing an official who is big on gun control issues.

By: calapanpo

calapanpo — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 19:29:57 +0000

@aarondavid826
And sadly in our day and age we have not been able to destroy racism and sexism.

By: Justice4all311

Justice4all311 — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 19:29:49 +0000

if its not in the constitution its nonsense.

By: Justice4all311

Justice4all311 — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 19:07:40 +0000

politics are bought and sold. the constitution is timeless

By: jerdeb4evr

jerdeb4evr — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 18:31:21 +0000

You are correct. I agree.

By: whoo689

whoo689 — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 18:10:07 +0000

I wish so many liberals would quit bitching about corporate personhood. Get over it! As long as corporations exist, and we’re gonna regulate and tax them, they have EVERY RIGHT to some privileges and protections, such as free speech. I mean, why do liberals make an exception on free speech for corporations?? If someone slanders or libels a person’s company, shouldn’t he be able to speak out and tell the truth?

What if you owned a company? would you really sit there and take it?

By: whoo689

whoo689 — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 17:11:43 +0000

Put yourselves in corporate shoes for a second. Now, obviously sometimes corporations are a little too selfish in campaigning for certain things and don’t seem to take into consideration how it’ll affect people, but by and large, they don’t like being walked all over. No one does.

But when a corporation says “I’m not gonna take it anymore” and stands up for its right to be autonomous and have SOME freedom to pursue its self-interest, the left bitches and says it shouldn’t be allowed.

By: whoo689

whoo689 — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 16:13:43 +0000

Why shouldn’t it be allowed?? Because you have a really distorted view of how campaigns and campaign finance work? Because you believe the lies that corporations can and actually legally give millions a campaign to a single candidate (federal corporate treasury donations are illegal, and PACs can only donate 5 grand to candidates)? The fact is, the entities that can donate the MOST money in a campaign are the parties themselves, and you can give the largest donation to a party as well.

By: whoo689

whoo689 — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 15:58:10 +0000

So if you wanna go after an entity for “buying votes” because of campaign contributions, look to the state, local and federal parties, not corporations. And how come the left thinks it’s bad to allow unions to supposedly contribute unlimited amounts (which has never been allowed, at least not in recent memory) but unions and other special interests get free reign? Hell, unions are pretty damn cozy with the Democrats, ya know.

So the Left and the Right really are equally corrupt here.

By: whoo689

whoo689 — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 14:59:32 +0000

And are corporations inherently somehow WORSE than unions or other interest groups in society? I would argue NO. All are equally valid and necessary. Big business and big labor both need limited power. I mean, what about those workers who don’t particularly feel much allegiance to either of those?? The current system leaves us out. And if you don’t live in a right-to-work state, you can be forced to join a union for a job. At least with corporations, you can say no to their job offers.