Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

The left's Roe v. Wade: Corporate Speech is not 'Free Speech' (overturning Santa Clara Co. v. So.PR)

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
Ninja Jordan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-18-07 05:12 PM
Original message
The left's Roe v. Wade: Corporate Speech is not 'Free Speech' (overturning Santa Clara Co. v. So.PR)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
tbyg52 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-18-07 05:32 PM
Response to Original message
1. Of course corporate speech is not free speech
Because corporations are not people. Money isn't free speech either.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ninja Jordan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-18-07 05:33 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Will a Democratic president nominate judges who agree with us?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tbyg52 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-18-07 05:36 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. I sure hope so,
but I think it should be obvious to the most casual observer.

Corporations are not people. They are a legal fiction designed to protect the owners of the corporation, who *are* real people, individually.

Money is not free speech (as in campaign contributions, for instance), because if it were some people would have more free speech than others. Oh, wait, they *do*! Which doesn't make it right.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ninja Jordan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-18-07 05:39 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. That's right. This issue goes to the very heart of what is killing our democracy.
The problem is staring progressives in the face. Will they see it?? Are progressive think-tanks writing about any of this stuff? This should be a seminal issue, much like how RvW is for the right. IMO this is THE litmus test for any potential judge nominated by a Democratic president. If a potential judicial nominee fails to see the fallacy inherent in this decision--then Americans shall not support him or her.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bobbolink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-18-07 05:47 PM
Response to Reply #3
7. Unfortunately, corporations were given the status and rights of a "person"
a very long time ago.

That should be overturned.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Manifestor_of_Light Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-18-07 08:51 PM
Response to Reply #7
15. It's a headnote to that case, not in the actual opinion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bobbolink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-19-07 02:18 PM
Response to Reply #15
20. You just needed to "correct" someone today?
The post above complained about corporations having rights as "persons".

I said that happened a long time ago.

That is FACT.

Find someone else to hassle.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Canuckistanian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-18-07 05:40 PM
Response to Original message
5. I just want to create dummy companies to write off my debt
But I can't, can I?

At the very least, if corporations want to be considered "persons", then they shouldn't have rights that I don't have.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ninja Jordan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-18-07 05:45 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. Corporations have rights that last forever, because it cannot 'die.'
Edited on Sun Mar-18-07 05:45 PM by Ninja Jordan
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Peace Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-18-07 07:11 PM
Response to Reply #6
9. Yes, this definitely IS the problem with our Corporate Rulers. The Corporate Entity
lives forever, and thus accumulate vast wealth, lands and power, and, in turn, have used that power to write our laws, to gobble up all news/opinion media into monopolies to drive the corporate bullshit line into our brains, 24/7, and, recently, to even grab control of our election system with electronic voting machines run on 'TRADE SECRET,' PROPRIETARY programming code, owned and controlled by rightwing Bushite corporations.

I hope all who heard about it were as appalled as I was, when the FL-13 Congressional election revealed 18,000 'disappeared' Democratic votes (in an election decided by about 300 votes), and, when the lawyers for the losing candidate (a Democrat, of course--these "anomalies" never hurt Republicans) took the matter to court, and asked to review ES&S's secret code, ES&S refused, and claimed that its right to profit from our elections trumps the right of the voters to know how their votes were counted. And the judge agreed!

'TRADE SECRET,' PROPRIETARY code in our election system! Can you believe it? So completely outrageous and mind-boggling. How this happened is a long story involving both Republican and Democratic corruption. But let me just say this: It is the heart of our problem now. Two rightwing Bushite corporations--Diebold and ES&S--control almost all vote counting in the country, and my guestimate is that they are placing a 5% to 10% "thumb on the scales" for Bushites, warmongers and corporatists. They have the capability to do this without detection. Why wouldn't they? They are scumbag Bushites. And there is plenty of evidence that this is exactly what they are doing.

And changing this has to be Priority No. 1, for American Revolution II: The defeat of our Corporate Rulers.

We have 75% of the American people opposing the Iraq War and wanting it ended, and yet we could only achieve a 50/50 Congress. Part of the problem is that only 1/3 of the Senate was up for reelection this time, so it's still full of Bushite dinosaurs. But if our votes had been properly counted--in the primaries and in the general election--I believe that the House would have many more antiwar votes than it does, and that the Democrats won 50 seats, not just 30. The bigger House landslide would have given the House more clout on both ending the war and impeaching Bush/Cheney. I can't fault Pelosi and others for how they have proceeded, given this handicap, but I CAN fault them for not burning the capitol down to get the "Help America Vote for Bush Act" of 2002 thrown out, and a mandated return to hand-counted paper ballots. This failure is utterly bewildering to me. Now's there chance. Why don't they do it? How can they tolerate rightwing Bushite corporations "counting" all our votes under a veil of corporate secrecy?

But they are NOT doing it--they are only going to put a bandaid on it (if that) and give more billions of our hard-earned taxpayer dollars to Diebold and ES&S to "fix" the election system that they deliberately broke. This is perhaps a measure of what we are really up against with the corruption in our own party. In any case, if we, the people, want transparent vote counting--vote counting that we can all see and understand--we are going to have to get it done at the state/local level.

It is perhaps ALSO a measure of the level of corporate bullshit brainwashing in all news media (except the internet) that the utter outrageousness of Bushite corporate control of our elections, with PRIVATE, SECRET programming code, has not occurred to more people, and is not on everyone's lips. That WAS the fascist coup. October 2003, almost simultaneous with the Iraq War Resolution, and most certainly related to it.

You can't have an unjust war, in a democracy--especially one with the Vietnam War in living memory--without fixing the elections. That's what they did.

Nobody else may have been paying attention to the polls in Feb. 2003--or remember them now--but the Corporate Rulers damned sure were. FIFTY-SIX PERCENT of the American people opposed the Iraq war before it ever started, and before all the lies that Colin Powell told at the UN were fully exposed. 56%! That would be a landslide in a presidential election, and the thing is, it more than likely was. Bush lost. The American people rejected this unjust war, that was based on a pack of lies, and all the associated lawlessness (torture, for instance--63% opposed to torture "under any circumstances"--May '04).

The Corporate Rulers and war profiteers saw this coming. And they put a completely non-transparent vote counting system in place (fast-tracked between 2002 and 2004, with $3.9 billion in boondoggle funding) to take care of it--to reverse the will of the people. And they're still doing it.

Until we restore transparent vote counting, we CAN'T make progress on any other reform. It is blockaded by 40 "Blue Dog" (traitor) Democrats in the House, and by the Bushite dinosaurs and War Democrats in the Senate.

The very MECHANISM of change--citizen voting--has been gravely compromised, leaving us with what is barely recognizable as a democracy. We simply MUST change this. How--when the same forces that want endless war, and corporate looting, are also preventing election reform in Congress? At the state/local level, is my suggestion. And we may have to engage in a states' rights fight to fend off what Congress may well do, which is to cement Diebold and ES&S, and their secret vote counting code, in place, with a federal power grab over election systems. Right now, we have a temporary federal power grab. The bill that Russ Holt is proposing--in addition to being a lame bandaid on this system--makes federal control over election systems permanent, with the President having yet more power--the secret code will be "reviewed" by a commission appointed by the President. WE can't review it. Nor can our secretaries of state or local officials. Just the President's appointees.

I understand why election activists in states with a ZERO audit of these machines want the 2% audit that the Holt bill proposes. But, on a scale of 1 to 100, for transparency, 2% is just what it looks like--a 2. It is almost no transparency. 98% of the ballots will never be counted by human eyes. Yes, it's an improvement just to have ballots to count. Many places don't. They have to rely on Diebold/ES&S's WORD as to who won. But these machines are extremely insecure and insider hackable, and are run on secret code. They never should have been put in place without a ONE HUNDRED PERCENT audit, at least for the first several election cycles. In Venezuela, they handcount FIFTY-FIVE PERCENT of the ballots, as a check on the machines, and they have an OPEN SOURCE system (anyone may review the code by which the votes are counted). You wonder why Chavez is given such a bad rap by the Bushites, the corporate press and many Democrats as well? Here is one reason: They don't want you to know this--that they have "checks and balances" in Venezuela's elections, and we don't have them here. Our election system is wide open to fraud.

So, once again, if we want to end Corporate Rule, we have to find a way to change Corporate control of vote counting. We may have to be wily, and, say, let local/state election officials keep their crapass, EXPENSIVE machines (corruption is our chief problem), but demand that they handcount the Absentee Ballot votes, and post the results BEFORE any electronics are involved. There was a huge rebellion against the electronic voting machines in '06, by Absentee Ballot voting--people trying to get around the rigged electronics. The trouble is that they just "scan" the AB voters right into the rigged system. They don't really count them. They are no more secure than an optiscan vote. But AB voters are nevertheless a big constituency for transparent vote counting. And if we can get those votes counted and posted, then we are on our way to transparent system. AB voting is up to 50% of the vote in some places. That's a big check on electronic fraud. And the thing will snowball. Everyone will want their vote to be handcounted and posted. The machines will become obsolete--or merely used for data storage and reporting.

We have to be clever. We have to be wily. We have to be insistent. And we have to get it done.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ninja Jordan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-18-07 07:32 PM
Response to Reply #9
11. Great post.
Santa Clara goes to the election issue as well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Canuckistanian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-18-07 08:33 PM
Response to Reply #9
14. Is that all you have to say?
Jes' kiddin' :)

Great post. And good point. Corporate control of every facet of life must end.

But first start with the election system. Because without that, nothing happens.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Igel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-18-07 07:09 PM
Response to Original message
8. I have no problem with all incorporated entities
having no free speech rights.

I think there are those that will disagree with me. Exxon is incorporated. But so is Greenpeace, just under slightly different regs; the AFL-CIO is incorporated, as well, under yet slight different regs.

Corporate entities are corporate entities.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
w4rma Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-18-07 07:52 PM
Response to Reply #8
12. I don't disagree. Greenpeace and Exxon and the AFL-CIO all have people who individually can speak
for their groups.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JerseygirlCT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-18-07 07:22 PM
Response to Original message
10. A corporation is NOT an individual
I don't think corporate entities deserve individual rights.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kiahzero Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-18-07 08:03 PM
Response to Original message
13. Corporate personhood is important.
Do you think that DU should be protected from unreasonable searches and seizures, for instance?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ninja Jordan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-18-07 10:13 PM
Response to Reply #13
17. It is important in some respects. And I believe state legislatures would respond in kind
Edited on Sun Mar-18-07 10:15 PM by Ninja Jordan
and pass laws awarding corporate entities some of the protections that the Federal Constitution grants its citizens via the 14th Amendment (otherwise states would have trouble attracting businesses); but to conclude that the Constitution facially grants non-living corporate entities every protection under the Bill of Rights is disingenuous. Corporate entities should enjoy only the privileges willfully granted to them by citizens. Granting corporations the status of legal "persons" effectively rewrites the Constitution to serve corporate interests as though they were human interests.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Manifestor_of_Light Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-18-07 08:53 PM
Response to Original message
16. corporation versus person
What is a company that is not responsible for its actions? A corporation, which is created to avoid liability.

What do you call a person who is not responsible for their actions? Mentally ill. Or a minor or an incompetent. Extremely so.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kiahzero Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-18-07 10:23 PM
Response to Reply #16
18. False.
The assets of the people who create the corporation aren't reachable, but that doesn't mean that the "company is not responsible for its actions."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ninja Jordan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-19-07 12:18 PM
Response to Original message
19. kick
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Dec 26th 2024, 03:07 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC