The house of representatives has been bought. Here is definitive proof

[Triumph]

Corporations are the new people, my friend.

You are right, they are. That's why I fully support capital punishment for corporate CEO's when their depraved indifference, willful negligence, or otherwise outright criminal behaviour results in the deaths of others. I want to see a corporation put to death.

 

[MongGrel]

Corporations are the new people, my friend.

Anyone remember Ma Bell being busted up?

Those days have been over awhile.

 

[Linux23]

You are right, they are. That's why I fully support capital punishment for corporate CEO's when their depraved indifference, willful negligence, or otherwise outright criminal behaviour results in the deaths of others. I want to see a corporation put to death.

it's funny they are people when making loads of cash, but when how they made that cash gets exposed, suddenly everyone is blind, deaf and stupid.

 

[Bitek]

So what do we do? Criminalize lobbying? Criminalize donating to political campaigns?

Yep. It's frustrating, but there is no way to make this illegal, nor is it wise to.



What value does Cantor have that's worth 1M/yr? He knows people, powerful people.
Can't make knowing people and talking to them illegal.

The valuable part is the idea that he can make the people with power do what he asks for. Voters have no control of Cantor, but we have control of the powerful elected people. It's them that have to be punished for listening to the wrong people.

If they don't listen to lobbyists, then the value of lobbyists goes away, ergo Cantor has to find a real job.

That means voters can't just jump on the bandwagon of whatever proposal their party supports/ fights just because it's their part saying it. Of course that means the voter needs to be well educated and thoughtful about the issues,.... Eh, that's not going to ever happen...

 

[kage69]

lol @ the Dems that think he should have been ousted from Washington long ago for such behavior. At least he didn't post his penis or bang somebody not his wife. Actual morals.

Wanting corrupt assholes flung from power isn't hilarious. What is hilarious is republican parrots like you claiming moral standing of any kind. House republicans had to be browbeaten to support chronically and seriously ill Sept. 11th first responders, seems those funds were more important to foreign companies in the form of tax cuts.

Those kind of actual morals?

No? Were they the morals he used when he gutted low income programs to extend the Bush tax cuts?

How about the morals needed to tell the American people you're trying to create jobs here in the States, when you're actually encouraging companies to outsource those jobs overseas? Surely those morals came into play at some point!

No?

Ok, how about a hint? I really want to know what morals you speak of, but I'm having a hard time contemplating it all without laughing my ass off.

 

[sandorski]

Wanting corrupt assholes flung from power isn't hilarious. What is hilarious is republican parrots like you claiming moral standing of any kind. House republicans had to be browbeaten to support chronically and seriously ill Sept. 11th first responders, seems those funds were more important to foreign companies in the form of tax cuts.

Those kind of actual morals?

No? Were they the morals he used when he gutted low income programs to extend the Bush tax cuts?

How about the morals needed to tell the American people you're trying to create jobs here in the States, when you're actually encouraging companies to outsource those jobs overseas? Surely those morals came into play at some point!

No?

Ok, how about a hint? I really want to know what morals you speak of, but I'm having a hard time contemplating it all without laughing my ass off.

You need a good sarcasm detector for Sonniku posts.

 

[werepossum]

You are right, they are. That's why I fully support capital punishment for corporate CEO's when their depraved indifference, willful negligence, or otherwise outright criminal behaviour results in the deaths of others. I want to see a corporation put to death.

I don't necessarily want to see a corporation put to death and a corporation is (usually*) a separate entity from its CEO, but I do think that we need to relearn one simple fact: Corporations don't decide to break the law, people do. Sometimes a corporation unintentionally breaks the law and that's fine, prosecute and fine the corporation. But in other cases it's baldly apparent that the lawbreaking was intentional. In those cases, punishment for the corporation needs to run in parallel with prosecution of the individuals who made those decisions. It's difficult, it's time consuming, it pisses off people with money and influence - and it's justice.

* There is an argument to be made that for those corporations where management is intricately bound with the corporation, so that we cannot in good conscience force that corporation into action to which management has legitimate religious objections, then management should also be liable for any illegal activity of the corporation. Should be either/or, either a corporation is a separate legal entity from management in all matters or a corporation is legally the same entity as management in all matters. Get the protection = take the responsibility.

 

[Triumph]

I don't necessarily want to see a corporation put to death and a corporation is (usually*) a separate entity from its CEO, but I do think that we need to relearn one simple fact: Corporations don't decide to break the law, people do. Sometimes a corporation unintentionally breaks the law and that's fine, prosecute and fine the corporation. But in other cases it's baldly apparent that the lawbreaking was intentional. In those cases, punishment for the corporation needs to run in parallel with prosecution of the individuals who made those decisions. It's difficult, it's time consuming, it pisses off people with money and influence - and it's justice.

* There is an argument to be made that for those corporations where management is intricately bound with the corporation, so that we cannot in good conscience force that corporation into action to which management has legitimate religious objections, then management should also be liable for any illegal activity of the corporation. Should be either/or, either a corporation is a separate legal entity from management in all matters or a corporation is legally the same entity as management in all matters. Get the protection = take the responsibility.

I think you're kind of having cake and eating it to. If corporations are people because they are made up OF people, then those people should always be held responsible for what the corporation does. Not just sometimes.

 

[FerrelGeek]

Sure, write your congressman and tell him that if he doesn't do something about this you are going to vote him out of his $140,000 job where he will be offered a multi-million dollar job doing a lot less.

That may very well be true, but it doesn't negate anything I said. The old cliche - people hate congress but love their congressman.

Yes, there's a definite issue with retired congresscritters going to work for a lobbying firm after they retire. The whole 'inside the beltway' life is completely incestuous.

 

[schmuckley]

so what do we do? Criminalize lobbying? Criminalize donating to political campaigns?

bingo!

 

[Londo_Jowo]

The old cliche - people hate congress but love their congressman

Without a doubt this is spot on, look at how many congressmen have been serving for more than 10 terms (20 years).

 

[kage69]

You need a good sarcasm detector for Sonniku posts.

Batteries were definitely low, and I need to stop reading posts by others who are quite serious when they type stuff like that.

 

[MongGrel]

I think you're kind of having cake and eating it to. If corporations are people because they are made up OF people, then those people should always be held responsible for what the corporation does. Not just sometimes.

I believe that's one of the bigger things these days, you have a corporation represented as one entity.

In order to prosecute one you have to charge a board of people and probably prove they were all implicated to some extent and they all own a large bank of corporate lawyers.

Trying to hold a large corporation responsible is either a matter of either it being a slap on the wrist to them for whatever happens, or even trying to fight a hydra to begin with, there are a lot of heads to chop off on one "person" and more heads to replace the in most cases.

 

[Jhhnn]

This, exactly. As long as government remains able to make or break a corporation at will, we cannot remove money from the electoral process.

"At will" is basically slanderous, making the rest a non-sequiter.