Snydely Whiplash was a Banker as I remember. Scrooge was sort of a Banker. More recently we have Timmy Geithner, helicopter Ben, Alien Greenspan and the rest of the Federal Reserve are by definition Bankers.
Bankers are supposed to preserve and protect great wealth for the Greatly Wealthy. JOB well done gentlemen. You have successfully protected almost all the wealth in the USA for the Greatly Wealthy who by definition know how to protect money from anyone who might want to spend it, except the Greatly Wealthy.
I believe the Bankers have done their job very, very well.
Since BOTH the Republicans and the Democrats have hired the Bankers to do this to the USA, I can only find one solution. Vote all the politicians out and replace them with people that really don’t know how to run a country at all. Then when things get REALLY screwed up…
Please contact me for the very finest in guillotines hand made to your specifications. Extra dull for more fun or extra sharp to get the job done more quickly. We can also accommodate extra large heads for the fat head politicians that never got a clue.
The French are Revolting, but of course, and we can to. We had the Revolution back in the 1700’s and then the French caught up in the 1800’s. Now WE can be revolting just a few short moments after the French.
I am off to break open another keg of wine on the cobblestone streets for the vermin that we call US citizens.
Why do we keep perpetuating this notion that Republicans are fat cats full of corporate money and Dems have nothing to do with the Banks, Corporations, or Big Pharma? Robert’s decision also preserved the rights of unions and non-profits to engage in FREE SPEECH leading up to an election. It is a neutral decision, it makes no distinction about who is allowed to air the ads. It simply restores the ability of groups of people to voice their opinion within the completely arbitrary timeframe of “60 days prior to an election.” How can you say you have freedom of speech over the airwaves, but not at certain times when I tell you?!
I fail to see why so many are up in arms about this….the Citizen’s United ad against Hillary wasn’t going to sway me one way or another. Who was worried about it?
@ tigger and habenero ,,,,,,,,,, It is not a bill, it is a Supreme Court decision on Freedom of Speech. Uniions do not have the money of Corporations to spend on political campaigns. their money comes from political action committees. That is donations from individual members for that specific purpose. Since only 7 to 8%of all workers are members and only about 2% of these give to politics, union money doesn’t amount to a hill of beans.
On the subject of banks, they have clever ways to get you.
I cashed in a mutual fund and directed that the money be put in an account that is FDIC insured.
A month later I received a bill for $40 for my brokerage account.
“But I don’t have a brokerage account anymore,” I protested.
“Yes you do, it just has a zero balance.’
I had to pay it.
What the unions lack in deep pockets, they partially make up for with numbers. Now that they can use dues money for campaigning it puts them at about 3/4 scale. To say there is no money on the left is disingenuous “poor me”… There is less, and less of a reserve but the coffers aren’t empty.
What I found appalling in the court decision was the equation of money with free speech. It’s nonsensical to start and does permanently advantage small groups “voices” over others.
And to cap it off by removing the transparency is even worse.
It doesn’t matter if it’s the unions or the chamber of commerce’s foreign money
a) buying elections shouldn’t be allowed and
b) if you’re going to allow it, you should have to be up front about where the purchase price is coming from.
Liberals have made a career out of crying injustice and unfairness. When the facts come out that don’t match what they believe with all their hearts they say it just can’t be true.
“Public-Employees Union Now Leads All Groups in Independent Election Outlays”
They just passed the Chamber of Commerce
So not are they not outspending you, you are outspending them. Shock. it can’t be true.
The wealthy Republicans and/or CEOs are making a fortune in the stock market now as it recovers, not to mention buying up property on the cheap, and sitting on their profits and/or donating some of them to the Republicans and unnamed TV ad buying political front organizations.
When and if the Republicans are back in power they will start creating jobs with this cash they have been withholding and then claim the Republicans saved the economy and brought the jobs back.
Unions now represent under 8% of workers, the numbers and the $$ aren’t there any more. My brother-in-law retired as a Vice President of one of the world’s largest banks- a few years later he stated he didn’t recognize the corporation or the industry post-Reagan, as it had become to quote: “a legalized Mafia”.
The Roberts court made “free speech” “Fee speech”. It is the corporations, not the people or unions, that control the big bucks. Even blaming a few super-wealthy INDIVIDUALS doesn’t cut it. Though their contributions may stimulate others, it remains by far the corporations and their “now silent partners” who hold the purse strings.
lib1, exactly where in the constitution does it say money equals speech? exactly where in the constitution does it say that corporate funds (which includes shareholder funds) can be given without consent of shareholders and can be given anonymously to boot?
This was blatant judicial activism on behalf of Robert’s SCOTUS. The issue they “decided” wasn’t even before them, remember? They told the attorneys they wanted to decide an issue, how about giving us some brief to look at before we write our own legislation?
Re Wall St. Journal article; I’m going to want to see some independent confirmation of that now that Murdoch owns Wall St. Journal. I suspect they’ve collected data in such a way to promote right wing views. If it’s independently confirmed, then I’ll believe it. Not saying it isn’t true, but will never take Fox/Murdoch claim as fact without independent confirmation.
Libertarian, I saw the numbers, but the Chamber is only one route by which the Corporations will channel money. Add in wealthy individuals, where Soros and friends are severely out-numbered, and you get a more realistic picture.
That said, ban it all. No more campaign ads. Should we really be selling politicians the way we sell soft drinks? How many people are voting based on 30 seconds worth of soundbites?
If they want TV time, debates and Q&A sessions only.
Most of you will remember a 1969 short feature that ran in theaters called “Bambi meets Godzilla”. I’ll assume that’s true since it’s still running on Youtube. It’s a VERY short feature.
“Bambi meets Godzilla” makes a great allegory for the 1% of America that owns 50% of its wealth. You can buy almost anything, but come election day in what’s left of the republic, David Koch has the same number of votes as Joe the Plunger.
To modern US neoconservatives (oddly enough, called “neo-liberals” in the rest of the world), it’s known as, “that democracy-problem thingy”. You have to find a way to effectively appoint the members of all three branches of government by controlling their access to corporate media and campaign funds; that’s why Murdoch and Ailes built a propaganda conduit to rent to them. If you get thirty guys together who have annual incomes on the order of one to ten billion dollars each, it’s not that difficult.
In the eighties, it was called “Morning in America” and “trickle-down economics”. This year, it has the same initials as “toilet paper” (renting buses doesn’t really cost very much), appropriate because the Koch brothers—used here as a metaphor, there are thirty or so other players in these majors–own Angel Soft, as well as Brawny Towels and the Roberts Court to deal with any unforeseen spills. The Kochs felt comfortable in June of this year in inviting Justices Scalia and Thomas to a meeting of 200 or so close corporate friends to help plan the “culture of prosperity”.
We are already an oligarchy, headed by people who control things that you need, things the Mafia would love to control: Energy. Health Care. The “security-industrial complex”. We’ve already returned to the Robber Baron days, when the Rockefeller family owned their own US senator outright.
But please, don’t be in a hurry to scrap the machinery of the old republic. We may need it again, and if we do, there won’t be time to build it from scratch.
napaeric over 13 years ago
Snydely Whiplash was a Banker as I remember. Scrooge was sort of a Banker. More recently we have Timmy Geithner, helicopter Ben, Alien Greenspan and the rest of the Federal Reserve are by definition Bankers. Bankers are supposed to preserve and protect great wealth for the Greatly Wealthy. JOB well done gentlemen. You have successfully protected almost all the wealth in the USA for the Greatly Wealthy who by definition know how to protect money from anyone who might want to spend it, except the Greatly Wealthy. I believe the Bankers have done their job very, very well. Since BOTH the Republicans and the Democrats have hired the Bankers to do this to the USA, I can only find one solution. Vote all the politicians out and replace them with people that really don’t know how to run a country at all. Then when things get REALLY screwed up… Please contact me for the very finest in guillotines hand made to your specifications. Extra dull for more fun or extra sharp to get the job done more quickly. We can also accommodate extra large heads for the fat head politicians that never got a clue. The French are Revolting, but of course, and we can to. We had the Revolution back in the 1700’s and then the French caught up in the 1800’s. Now WE can be revolting just a few short moments after the French. I am off to break open another keg of wine on the cobblestone streets for the vermin that we call US citizens.
HabaneroBuck over 13 years ago
Why do we keep perpetuating this notion that Republicans are fat cats full of corporate money and Dems have nothing to do with the Banks, Corporations, or Big Pharma? Robert’s decision also preserved the rights of unions and non-profits to engage in FREE SPEECH leading up to an election. It is a neutral decision, it makes no distinction about who is allowed to air the ads. It simply restores the ability of groups of people to voice their opinion within the completely arbitrary timeframe of “60 days prior to an election.” How can you say you have freedom of speech over the airwaves, but not at certain times when I tell you?!
I fail to see why so many are up in arms about this….the Citizen’s United ad against Hillary wasn’t going to sway me one way or another. Who was worried about it?
Justice22 over 13 years ago
@ tigger and habenero ,,,,,,,,,, It is not a bill, it is a Supreme Court decision on Freedom of Speech. Uniions do not have the money of Corporations to spend on political campaigns. their money comes from political action committees. That is donations from individual members for that specific purpose. Since only 7 to 8%of all workers are members and only about 2% of these give to politics, union money doesn’t amount to a hill of beans.
rockngolfer over 13 years ago
On the subject of banks, they have clever ways to get you.
I cashed in a mutual fund and directed that the money be put in an account that is FDIC insured. A month later I received a bill for $40 for my brokerage account. “But I don’t have a brokerage account anymore,” I protested. “Yes you do, it just has a zero balance.’ I had to pay it.
RunninOnEmpty over 13 years ago
Since money is speech, all but a very few of us have been effectively drowned out.
meetinthemiddle over 13 years ago
What the unions lack in deep pockets, they partially make up for with numbers. Now that they can use dues money for campaigning it puts them at about 3/4 scale. To say there is no money on the left is disingenuous “poor me”… There is less, and less of a reserve but the coffers aren’t empty.
What I found appalling in the court decision was the equation of money with free speech. It’s nonsensical to start and does permanently advantage small groups “voices” over others.
And to cap it off by removing the transparency is even worse.
It doesn’t matter if it’s the unions or the chamber of commerce’s foreign money a) buying elections shouldn’t be allowed and b) if you’re going to allow it, you should have to be up front about where the purchase price is coming from.
Justice22 over 13 years ago
Meetinthemiddle,,,,,,, Union dues cannot be used for campaigning. Only money donated to a union PAC can be used for political purpose.
Libertarian1 over 13 years ago
justice, billdog, kent
Liberals have made a career out of crying injustice and unfairness. When the facts come out that don’t match what they believe with all their hearts they say it just can’t be true.
“Public-Employees Union Now Leads All Groups in Independent Election Outlays”
They just passed the Chamber of Commerce
So not are they not outspending you, you are outspending them. Shock. it can’t be true.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303339504575566481761790288.html?mod=WSJhpLEFTTopStories#
benbrilling over 13 years ago
Here’s my theory:
The wealthy Republicans and/or CEOs are making a fortune in the stock market now as it recovers, not to mention buying up property on the cheap, and sitting on their profits and/or donating some of them to the Republicans and unnamed TV ad buying political front organizations.
When and if the Republicans are back in power they will start creating jobs with this cash they have been withholding and then claim the Republicans saved the economy and brought the jobs back.
rotts over 13 years ago
Trippelspammerflaggen!
believecommonsense over 13 years ago
^^ benbriling, i think you may be right. It’s all about manipulation, suffering of the middle class and unemployed be d@mned!
Dtroutma over 13 years ago
Unions now represent under 8% of workers, the numbers and the $$ aren’t there any more. My brother-in-law retired as a Vice President of one of the world’s largest banks- a few years later he stated he didn’t recognize the corporation or the industry post-Reagan, as it had become to quote: “a legalized Mafia”.
The Roberts court made “free speech” “Fee speech”. It is the corporations, not the people or unions, that control the big bucks. Even blaming a few super-wealthy INDIVIDUALS doesn’t cut it. Though their contributions may stimulate others, it remains by far the corporations and their “now silent partners” who hold the purse strings.
Libertarian1 over 13 years ago
trout
Did you actually read the union numbers i posted?
It wasn’t the Roberts Court, it was the constitution. See 1st amendment. See ACLU.
believecommonsense over 13 years ago
lib1, exactly where in the constitution does it say money equals speech? exactly where in the constitution does it say that corporate funds (which includes shareholder funds) can be given without consent of shareholders and can be given anonymously to boot?
This was blatant judicial activism on behalf of Robert’s SCOTUS. The issue they “decided” wasn’t even before them, remember? They told the attorneys they wanted to decide an issue, how about giving us some brief to look at before we write our own legislation?
Re Wall St. Journal article; I’m going to want to see some independent confirmation of that now that Murdoch owns Wall St. Journal. I suspect they’ve collected data in such a way to promote right wing views. If it’s independently confirmed, then I’ll believe it. Not saying it isn’t true, but will never take Fox/Murdoch claim as fact without independent confirmation.
Spaghettus1 over 13 years ago
Libertarian, I saw the numbers, but the Chamber is only one route by which the Corporations will channel money. Add in wealthy individuals, where Soros and friends are severely out-numbered, and you get a more realistic picture.
That said, ban it all. No more campaign ads. Should we really be selling politicians the way we sell soft drinks? How many people are voting based on 30 seconds worth of soundbites?
If they want TV time, debates and Q&A sessions only.
seriocomix over 13 years ago
Most of you will remember a 1969 short feature that ran in theaters called “Bambi meets Godzilla”. I’ll assume that’s true since it’s still running on Youtube. It’s a VERY short feature.
“Bambi meets Godzilla” makes a great allegory for the 1% of America that owns 50% of its wealth. You can buy almost anything, but come election day in what’s left of the republic, David Koch has the same number of votes as Joe the Plunger.
To modern US neoconservatives (oddly enough, called “neo-liberals” in the rest of the world), it’s known as, “that democracy-problem thingy”. You have to find a way to effectively appoint the members of all three branches of government by controlling their access to corporate media and campaign funds; that’s why Murdoch and Ailes built a propaganda conduit to rent to them. If you get thirty guys together who have annual incomes on the order of one to ten billion dollars each, it’s not that difficult.
In the eighties, it was called “Morning in America” and “trickle-down economics”. This year, it has the same initials as “toilet paper” (renting buses doesn’t really cost very much), appropriate because the Koch brothers—used here as a metaphor, there are thirty or so other players in these majors–own Angel Soft, as well as Brawny Towels and the Roberts Court to deal with any unforeseen spills. The Kochs felt comfortable in June of this year in inviting Justices Scalia and Thomas to a meeting of 200 or so close corporate friends to help plan the “culture of prosperity”.
We are already an oligarchy, headed by people who control things that you need, things the Mafia would love to control: Energy. Health Care. The “security-industrial complex”. We’ve already returned to the Robber Baron days, when the Rockefeller family owned their own US senator outright.
But please, don’t be in a hurry to scrap the machinery of the old republic. We may need it again, and if we do, there won’t be time to build it from scratch.