Author Topic: Constitutional Amendments -- There Is A Pattern.  (Read 9881 times)

Offline AlfredDrake

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 86
  • I love Conservative Political Forum!

Online Solar

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 61044
  • Gender: Male
Re: Constitutional Amendments -- There Is A Pattern.
« Reply #16 on: December 13, 2014, 10:21:28 AM »
Koolaid is for kids, TEA is for adults

Offline AlfredDrake

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 86
  • I love Conservative Political Forum!
Re: Constitutional Amendments -- There Is A Pattern.
« Reply #17 on: December 13, 2014, 11:03:37 AM »
Thanks, but you'll find most ignore Wiki as a source for anything political.

OK, but in this case there wasn't any comment.  It's just a list.  It would be interesting to know which of these proposed amendments could be supported or if they're all seen as tampering with the wishes of the founding fathers. 

One proposal that looks interesting (although it might be overkill to make it an amendment and it was written by a socialist) is the Saving American Democracy amendment.  It could possibly cross philosophical lines if you think corporations have too much sway.  I'm not advocating it, I just find it interesting.

Online Solar

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 61044
  • Gender: Male
Re: Constitutional Amendments -- There Is A Pattern.
« Reply #18 on: December 13, 2014, 12:31:51 PM »
OK, but in this case there wasn't any comment.  It's just a list.  It would be interesting to know which of these proposed amendments could be supported or if they're all seen as tampering with the wishes of the founding fathers. 

One proposal that looks interesting (although it might be overkill to make it an amendment and it was written by a socialist) is the Saving American Democracy amendment.  It could possibly cross philosophical lines if you think corporations have too much sway.  I'm not advocating it, I just find it interesting.
"Saving American Democracy"?  :biggrin: There is no such animal.
Koolaid is for kids, TEA is for adults

Offline AlfredDrake

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 86
  • I love Conservative Political Forum!
Re: Constitutional Amendments -- There Is A Pattern.
« Reply #19 on: December 13, 2014, 12:50:03 PM »
"Saving American Democracy"?  :biggrin: There is no such animal.

Did you mean there is no democracy or there is no such amendment? 

Online Solar

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 61044
  • Gender: Male
Re: Constitutional Amendments -- There Is A Pattern.
« Reply #20 on: December 13, 2014, 12:57:20 PM »
Did you mean there is no democracy or there is no such amendment?
We Are Not A Democracy! We Are a Republic!
Show me where the founders claimed we were a Democracy.
Koolaid is for kids, TEA is for adults

Offline AlfredDrake

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 86
  • I love Conservative Political Forum!
Re: Constitutional Amendments -- There Is A Pattern.
« Reply #21 on: December 13, 2014, 01:36:37 PM »
We Are Not A Democracy! We Are a Republic!
Show me where the founders claimed we were a Democracy.

OK.  I guess he should have called it Saving Our Republic.  The proposed amendment says that corporations are not entitled to the same constitutional rights as people.  It bans campaign contributions to candidates by corporations and gives the congress and the states the power to regulate campaign spending.  It over turns the supreme court decision. 

I know it was written by a socialist and I know the reasons the Electoral Commission was sued, but I don't think that "We the people..." was meant to include giant corporations with tons of money to buy influence.  It makes me feel puny and powerless.  Besides including a legal entity in the definition of person, just doesn't ring true to me.  Why should Microsoft, Berkshire Hathaway, or Google have more power than I do?  Still, I don't know if it should be an amendment, I just like the idea.

Online Solar

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 61044
  • Gender: Male
Re: Constitutional Amendments -- There Is A Pattern.
« Reply #22 on: December 13, 2014, 01:48:06 PM »
OK.  I guess he should have called it Saving Our Republic.  The proposed amendment says that corporations are not entitled to the same constitutional rights as people.  It bans campaign contributions to candidates by corporations and gives the congress and the states the power to regulate campaign spending.  It over turns the supreme court decision. 

I know it was written by a socialist and I know the reasons the Electoral Commission was sued, but I don't think that "We the people..." was meant to include giant corporations with tons of money to buy influence.  It makes me feel puny and powerless.  Besides including a legal entity in the definition of person, just doesn't ring true to me.  Why should Microsoft, Berkshire Hathaway, or Google have more power than I do?  Still, I don't know if it should be an amendment, I just like the idea.
Then you and Pelosi share a common goal of amending the Constitution.
Funny how it was never an issue when Unions did it, but when the common investor sinks his money into a corporation willingly, one that shares his ideals, it's suddenly wrong.

Let that absorb a moment.
Koolaid is for kids, TEA is for adults

Offline AlfredDrake

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 86
  • I love Conservative Political Forum!
Re: Constitutional Amendments -- There Is A Pattern.
« Reply #23 on: December 13, 2014, 02:44:24 PM »
Then you and Pelosi share a common goal of amending the Constitution.
Funny how it was never an issue when Unions did it, but when the common investor sinks his money into a corporation willingly, one that shares his ideals, it's suddenly wrong.

Let that absorb a moment.

Absorbed.  I don't like anyone buying influence: unions, corporations, wealthy individuals, it doesn't matter.  Since we're a republic, whoever I voted for, if they win, should represent me and not someone who paid for their election.  With PAC's you don't even know who's footing the bill.  It could be someone whose interests are detrimental to me and I wouldn't even find out about it until their man's in office (think George Soros).  Where's the thoughtful discussion of issues, its been replaced by 30 second sound bites and pictures of candidates having a bad hair day.  If we're to have freedom, then everything needs to be transparent, otherwise how can you make a wise decision?  Big business and big government fear you and work hand in hand to make sure that you as an individual don't have the power.  I thought that was what this forum was all about, protecting the freedom of the individual.  Maybe I was wrong. 

Offline TboneAgain

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4406
  • Gender: Male
  • Alex, I'll try "THINGS ONLY I KNOW" for $200.
Re: Constitutional Amendments -- There Is A Pattern.
« Reply #24 on: December 13, 2014, 08:31:49 PM »
Absorbed.  I don't like anyone buying influence: unions, corporations, wealthy individuals, it doesn't matter.  Since we're a republic, whoever I voted for, if they win, should represent me and not someone who paid for their election.  With PAC's you don't even know who's footing the bill.  It could be someone whose interests are detrimental to me and I wouldn't even find out about it until their man's in office (think George Soros).  Where's the thoughtful discussion of issues, its been replaced by 30 second sound bites and pictures of candidates having a bad hair day.  If we're to have freedom, then everything needs to be transparent, otherwise how can you make a wise decision?  Big business and big government fear you and work hand in hand to make sure that you as an individual don't have the power.  I thought that was what this forum was all about, protecting the freedom of the individual.  Maybe I was wrong.

This forum is all about discussing and promoting what is known as the conservative point of view. Part and parcel of that point of view is the preservation of individual freedom. In fact, individual freedom can be said to be the one principle that drives and defines conservatism. Think about it.

Smaller/less government = more individual freedom.

Fewer regulations = more individual freedom.

Lower taxes = more individual freedom.

Literal interpretation of the Constitution = more individual freedom.

See how it works?  :tounge:
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. -- Tenth Amendment to the US Constitution

Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; IT IS FORCE. -- George Washington

Online supsalemgr

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11689
  • Gender: Male
Re: Constitutional Amendments -- There Is A Pattern.
« Reply #25 on: December 14, 2014, 05:24:02 AM »
OK.  I guess he should have called it Saving Our Republic.  The proposed amendment says that corporations are not entitled to the same constitutional rights as people.  It bans campaign contributions to candidates by corporations and gives the congress and the states the power to regulate campaign spending.  It over turns the supreme court decision. 

I know it was written by a socialist and I know the reasons the Electoral Commission was sued, but I don't think that "We the people..." was meant to include giant corporations with tons of money to buy influence.  It makes me feel puny and powerless.  Besides including a legal entity in the definition of person, just doesn't ring true to me.  Why should Microsoft, Berkshire Hathaway, or Google have more power than I do?  Still, I don't know if it should be an amendment, I just like the idea.

What about unions?
"If you can't run with the big dawgs, stay on the porch!"

Online Solar

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 61044
  • Gender: Male
Re: Constitutional Amendments -- There Is A Pattern.
« Reply #26 on: December 14, 2014, 08:11:25 AM »
Absorbed.  I don't like anyone buying influence: unions, corporations, wealthy individuals, it doesn't matter.  Since we're a republic, whoever I voted for, if they win, should represent me and not someone who paid for their election.  With PAC's you don't even know who's footing the bill.  It could be someone whose interests are detrimental to me and I wouldn't even find out about it until their man's in office (think George Soros).  Where's the thoughtful discussion of issues, its been replaced by 30 second sound bites and pictures of candidates having a bad hair day.  If we're to have freedom, then everything needs to be transparent, otherwise how can you make a wise decision?  Big business and big government fear you and work hand in hand to make sure that you as an individual don't have the power.  I thought that was what this forum was all about, protecting the freedom of the individual.  Maybe I was wrong.
All that happened was, SCOTUS removed barriers to groups voicing their opinions with money to create leverage.
Basically what they did was create competition for lobbyists of the elite. For example, Christians, Vets, Conservatives of all stripes can now compete on what used to be an elitist fixed field.

Again, absorb.
Koolaid is for kids, TEA is for adults

Offline AlfredDrake

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 86
  • I love Conservative Political Forum!
Re: Constitutional Amendments -- There Is A Pattern.
« Reply #27 on: December 14, 2014, 10:09:29 AM »
All that happened was, SCOTUS removed barriers to groups voicing their opinions with money to create leverage.
Basically what they did was create competition for lobbyists of the elite. For example, Christians, Vets, Conservatives of all stripes can now compete on what used to be an elitist fixed field.

Again, absorb.

That's true, but it's not all it did.  Let me tell you a little story.  The first part is true, the second part is a hypothetical.  I'll let you know when the story changes.  I'm not going to name name's because I have a pension that can be revoked at any time for any reason.

Our company supplies oil and gas related equipment for field development, product transmission, and refining.  Call it X Inc. out of Houston.  Back in the early 80's our business agent in Dubai (an agent is an independent contractor you pay a flat fee to so he can bribe all the right people and you don't  get your hands dirty because you don't really know what he's doing) told us that the Iranians needed revenue and wanted to refurbish some of their aging oil fields and develop a new one.  We could still do business with them, but they couldn't do business with the Great Satan.  No problem.  We have a regional facility in country Y so we shipped all our equipment there, did some minor assembly, and slapped made in country Y on everything (just like we do now with Chinese golf club heads and Japanese shafts, "Assembled in the USA").  Everybody was happy.  Us, the agent, the bribed Iranians, the Ayatollah, we were all making money.  That's the nice thing about business, it's amoral.  Making money is good, losing money is bad.  It's all black and white (or red in this case).  Then came the embargo in the 90's and the revenue stream from Iran was cut off.  No problem.  Country Y was not participating in the embargo.  We spun off part of our regional facility, incorporated it as our subsidiary under the laws of country Y, staffed it completely with local nationals (so no Americans were involved), and set up separate accounting so the only thing we saw were the numbers from our sub, which then rolled up into our numbers with no knowledge of where the money came from (the sub was also doing business in surrounding countries like Iraq).  Now we could turn the revenue stream back on.  The only problem was the Iranians couldn't get their hands on any cash.  No problem.  We sold them their equipment through a trading company registered in another country, not participating in the embargo, who them bartered the equipment for oil.  Once again everybody's happy, including the trading company and now the Russians.  Why the Russians?  Because they wanted to supply uranium enrichment technology to Iran and now the Iranians had the additional resources to buy it (there is no good or bad, there's only money).

This is about the time I retired so the rest of the story is hypothetical, but it illustrates the kind of thing that used to happen all the time, and can happen again with the SCOTUS decision.

Senator Bozo, a moderate Republican from the great state of Z,  is informed by the Jewish lobby about what's going on in Iran and since they're a big supporter of his,  they want some action.  So Senator Bozo starts an investigation and vows to introduce new regulations that will shutdown this kind of business activity.  Company X is not amused.  This is a billion dollar a year revenue stream.  Now since corporations are allowed to contribute to political campaigns and PACs don't have to reveal their donors, Company X dumps $100M into the campaign of Mr. Right.  They portray Senator Bozo as out of touch, part of the good old boy crony system, and probably a socialist, since he's compromised with the left at times during his 20 year tenure.  The attack ads are aired every fifteen minutes 24/7.  Senator Bozo loses the nomination and Mr. Right easily wins the election in the solid red state of Z.
Now the investigation is trashed and company X can go back to business as usual.  Everybody's happy again.  The Ayatollah, the bribed officials, the trading company, the agent, the sub, company X, the Russians, and you (because that socialist Bozo is out of office).  If Israel is unhappy that's ok.  We'll sell them laser guided bunker busters so they can take out the enrichment facilities.  If they destroy those facilities that's great, because then the Iranians will have to buy everything over again.  It's so beautiful.  It's perfection. 

Online Solar

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 61044
  • Gender: Male
Re: Constitutional Amendments -- There Is A Pattern.
« Reply #28 on: December 14, 2014, 12:05:15 PM »
That's true, but it's not all it did.  Let me tell you a little story.  The first part is true, the second part is a hypothetical.  I'll let you know when the story changes.  I'm not going to name name's because I have a pension that can be revoked at any time for any reason.

Our company supplies oil and gas related equipment for field development, product transmission, and refining.  Call it X Inc. out of Houston.  Back in the early 80's our business agent in Dubai (an agent is an independent contractor you pay a flat fee to so he can bribe all the right people and you don't  get your hands dirty because you don't really know what he's doing) told us that the Iranians needed revenue and wanted to refurbish some of their aging oil fields and develop a new one.  We could still do business with them, but they couldn't do business with the Great Satan.  No problem.  We have a regional facility in country Y so we shipped all our equipment there, did some minor assembly, and slapped made in country Y on everything (just like we do now with Chinese golf club heads and Japanese shafts, "Assembled in the USA").  Everybody was happy.  Us, the agent, the bribed Iranians, the Ayatollah, we were all making money.  That's the nice thing about business, it's amoral.  Making money is good, losing money is bad.  It's all black and white (or red in this case).  Then came the embargo in the 90's and the revenue stream from Iran was cut off.  No problem.  Country Y was not participating in the embargo.  We spun off part of our regional facility, incorporated it as our subsidiary under the laws of country Y, staffed it completely with local nationals (so no Americans were involved), and set up separate accounting so the only thing we saw were the numbers from our sub, which then rolled up into our numbers with no knowledge of where the money came from (the sub was also doing business in surrounding countries like Iraq).  Now we could turn the revenue stream back on.  The only problem was the Iranians couldn't get their hands on any cash.  No problem.  We sold them their equipment through a trading company registered in another country, not participating in the embargo, who them bartered the equipment for oil.  Once again everybody's happy, including the trading company and now the Russians.  Why the Russians?  Because they wanted to supply uranium enrichment technology to Iran and now the Iranians had the additional resources to buy it (there is no good or bad, there's only money).

This is about the time I retired so the rest of the story is hypothetical, but it illustrates the kind of thing that used to happen all the time, and can happen again with the SCOTUS decision.

Senator Bozo, a moderate Republican from the great state of Z,  is informed by the Jewish lobby about what's going on in Iran and since they're a big supporter of his,  they want some action.  So Senator Bozo starts an investigation and vows to introduce new regulations that will shutdown this kind of business activity.  Company X is not amused.  This is a billion dollar a year revenue stream.  Now since corporations are allowed to contribute to political campaigns and PACs don't have to reveal their donors, Company X dumps $100M into the campaign of Mr. Right.  They portray Senator Bozo as out of touch, part of the good old boy crony system, and probably a socialist, since he's compromised with the left at times during his 20 year tenure.  The attack ads are aired every fifteen minutes 24/7.  Senator Bozo loses the nomination and Mr. Right easily wins the election in the solid red state of Z.
Now the investigation is trashed and company X can go back to business as usual.  Everybody's happy again.  The Ayatollah, the bribed officials, the trading company, the agent, the sub, company X, the Russians, and you (because that socialist Bozo is out of office).  If Israel is unhappy that's ok.  We'll sell them laser guided bunker busters so they can take out the enrichment facilities.  If they destroy those facilities that's great, because then the Iranians will have to buy everything over again.  It's so beautiful.  It's perfection.
Regardless of who supplies what, if Americans don't participate, the profit will no doubt go to the enemy, China, Russia, NK etc.
But then you try and wrap it up under a lie, the lie that PACS don't have to reveal where the money comes from.
http://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/superpacs.php?cycle=2012

Either we become an isolationist nation, or we freely participate in the free mkt is the question, there is no gray area here.
Koolaid is for kids, TEA is for adults

Online supsalemgr

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11689
  • Gender: Male
Re: Constitutional Amendments -- There Is A Pattern.
« Reply #29 on: December 14, 2014, 12:18:10 PM »
We are still awaiting an answer if you feel the same way about union contributions to candidates and parties.
"If you can't run with the big dawgs, stay on the porch!"

 

Powered by EzPortal