Liberal Forum

greatnpowerfuloz » 20 May 2014 12:07 pm » wrote:
Let's take GE as an example. GE is loaded with people but is not, in and of itself, a person. Let's say the top management decides to write 5 million into their budget destined fora SuperPac in support of a Democrat running for Senator in Texas. Mind you, this money is not the personal finances of the 'people' that comprise the top management nor is it a bunch of low level employees (people) within a corporation pooling their donations for a candidate. In fact, if most of the employees were polled, they'd say they were voting for the Republican candidate.

Where are the **** 'little people' in this scenario, bozo? You can support the practice of corporate financing of campaigns but don't be an asshole and claim that the will of "the people" is being represented here.

It ain't.

I support the rights of people who comprise unions, associations, and corporations to freely associate and practice their first amendment rights. So does the USSC as I posted earlier. If you do not support these constitutionally protected rights just say so. Bozo? I think you, ma'am, are acting like the bozo because what you wrote does not reflect anything I said.

It appears Ozzie supports the force payment of union dues, from what she calls the little people, that is used for political campaigns whether the person forced to pay the dues agrees or not. Which is the bigger crime? At least corporations are not forcing employees to pay for the electonic commicutions like unions do.

Again, for the ignorant like ozzie, it is illegal for corporations, unions, and non profit corporations to donate to candidates or political parties. My comments are related to Citizens United which discussed basically commercials.

Remember Ozzie, the UAW or GE does not have first amendment rights. But the people who comprise and run those entities do. Why do you wish to suppress their rights?