• Sprott Money
    04/29/2016 - 05:58
    There is unfortunately no basis for renewed optimism that this current litigation will have any meaningful impact on precious metals manipulation – with respect to either silver or gold.

Some People Have More 'Free-Speech' Than Others

Tyler Durden's picture




 

Who cares about healthcare? Thanks to the SCOTUS decision, Little Suzie Newsykins decided on her Summer job working for Democracy and 'Free-Speech' as there are plenty of jobs there. Free-speech is such a growth industry, "its on track to hit two billion 'speech-units' this campaign". The delightful young lady in this brief cartoon got her dream summer job because corporations are people; money is free-speech; and some people have more free-speech than others.

 

0
Your rating: None
 

- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Mon, 07/02/2012 - 17:52 | 2581907 Stackers
Stackers's picture

Dislike

Mon, 07/02/2012 - 18:10 | 2581953 BarreraNorman70
BarreraNorman70's picture

Democracy is so 19th century. ? Elections should be 21st century and be put on eBay. Highest corporate bidder win. Simple, quick and easy. Voters don't have to be distracted and educated to choose the best candidate so productivity will be higher.

Mon, 07/02/2012 - 18:15 | 2581959 The They
The They's picture

What if you're in debt? Does having negative "free speech units" mean your speech is suppressed?

Mon, 07/02/2012 - 18:55 | 2582038 CrockettAlmanac.com
CrockettAlmanac.com's picture

The problem is not that some people have more money to back their candidate for dictator than others do, the problem is the dictatorship itself.

Mon, 07/02/2012 - 19:46 | 2582172 BigJim
BigJim's picture

+1000

Mon, 07/02/2012 - 20:17 | 2582234 BKbroiler
BKbroiler's picture

-10,0000

No, No, NO.  Dammit, people.  Unlimited campaign contributions are WRONG.  Foreign entities being allowed to contribute to American politicians is WRONG.  This is literally the heart of corruption, the goddamn reason the system is fucked, and you're criticizing the post for pointing it out?  The problem is not that some people have more money to back their candidate... are you kidding me?  That's EXACTLY the problem. The system is broken because politicians are bribed.  That' it.  From Obama down to Sheriff Arpaio.

End Campaign Contributions. Period.  Money = Influence = Favors = Cronyism = FAIL

Mon, 07/02/2012 - 20:24 | 2582249 CaptainObvious
CaptainObvious's picture

While I agree with you, I'm not so naive as to think the people buying candidates with campaign donations now won't find some other way to "influence" their candidate of choice.  If they can't donate to a campaign, it will be truckloads of free widgets, free private plane use for a year, free vacations around the world, etc.

The problem is there aren't any ethical people in politics.  This isn't news to anyone, I know. ;)

Mon, 07/02/2012 - 21:31 | 2582350 chumbawamba
chumbawamba's picture

R E W A R D

1 Kilo 999.9 Gold Bar

1 Kilo of 999.9 fine gold

to whomever can locate in the Citizens United v. FEC opinion

any direct quote or indirect allusion to the claim that

"Corporations are people".

This is a serious offer.

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/09pdf/08-205.pdf

- HINT -

Do not look in these passages, as you will not find it within them:

"The dissent says that  speech  refers to oral communications of human
beings, and since corporations are not human beings they cannot speak.
Post, at 37, n. 55. This is sophistry. The authorized spokesman of a
corporation is a human being, who speaks on behalf ofthe human beings who
have formed that associationjust as the spokesman of an unincorporated
association speaks on behalf of itsmembers. The power to publish thoughts,
no less than the power to speak thoughts, belongs only to human beings,  
but the dissent sees noproblem with a corporations enjoying the freedom of
the press." (86, footnote 7)

"Although they make enormous contributions to our society, corporations are
not actually members of it." (88)

"The fact that corporations are different from human beings might seem to
need no elaboration, except that themajority opinion almost completely
elides it." (162)

"It might also be added that corporations have no consciences, no beliefs,
no feelings, no thoughts, no desires. Corporations help structure and
facilitate the activities of human beings, to be sure, and their 
personhood oftenserves as a useful legal fiction. But they are not
themselves members of We the People by whom and for whomour Constitution
was established." (163)

"But when the speakers in question are not real people..." (171)

(numbers in parenthesis are PDF page number)

First man to identify the exact page and line number within the opinion that effectively states "corporations are people" wins the gold bar.  One prize only.  Not transferable.  Void where prohibited.

I am Chumbawamba.

Mon, 07/02/2012 - 22:59 | 2582565 wisefool
wisefool's picture

I am not sure if there are sarc tags in this post.  So here goes. Mitt "14%" Romney said corporations are people. He is on the ballot. He has about a 14% chance of being in charge of the IRS in 2012. I have a 0% chance and pay 35%.

No Sarc: Send the gold bar to Peter Schiffs dad who is currently residing in levenworth.

Mon, 07/02/2012 - 23:22 | 2582611 wisefool
wisefool's picture

I got junked? Because I dont have image posting rights? or because I cant use bold?

I will give an ounce of gold to whom can show me the one page in the US taxation code that explains why I should pay somehwere between 20 and 25%.

Here is how a guy would do it without image posting rights, but rights to link to the CFR I just need one page in the tax code. Romney can not win this election with 14% of the vote.

 

ROMNEY: I would like 25 percent, but right now it's at 35, so people better pay what is legally required. But ultimately let's get it down to as low as we possibly can, if it's 20, if it's 25 but paying more than 25 percent, I think, is taking too much out of our pockets.

 

Mon, 07/02/2012 - 23:43 | 2582648 wisefool
wisefool's picture

Whats up with fight club lately? If you junk, you should atleast respond. I would honestly short the heck out of Mitt Romney on intrade.com but I respect Max Keiser. He said it was a bad idea for both finance and politics.

Tue, 07/03/2012 - 02:04 | 2582821 Vic Vinegar
Vic Vinegar's picture

I didn't junk you but am responding to note:

  • I don't respect Max Keiser.  Fading that guy in any way possible is probably a good idea.
  • It seems like chumbawamba is pointing out that despite what we often hear in the media that 'corporations are people' wasn't actually what was decided in court.  Shocking, I know that the media decided to run with something not factually correct, and despite what Mitt Romney may have said it still doesn't make it true.
Mon, 07/02/2012 - 23:08 | 2582585 Mr. Mandelbrot
Mr. Mandelbrot's picture

We have to start testing judges for amphetamines before, during, and after rulings.  This rambling psychosis takes the cake . . .

Mon, 07/02/2012 - 22:05 | 2582436 blunderdog
blunderdog's picture

Why don't the concerned parties just hire fifty million voters to go vote?

That's where this is all going, anyway. 

The only reason we have elections in the USA is to sell air-time.

Mon, 07/02/2012 - 22:23 | 2582479 Dburn
Dburn's picture

Give em time they're working on it. Hey, if you need $150 bucks, call the GOP and they'll send out yard signs. $50 to wear T-shirts but, you actually have to earn it by going to a bullshit corporate rally dressed up to look like a grassroots movement.

 

I'm thinking about selling naming rights for my garage door for this election. I think if they want to buy votes, it's our sworn duty as capitalists to make sure "the price is right".

Mon, 07/02/2012 - 22:37 | 2582509 CrockettAlmanac.com
CrockettAlmanac.com's picture

 

 

call the GOP and they'll send out yard signs. $50 to wear T-shirts but, you actually have to earn it by going to a bullshit corporate rally dressed up to look like a grassroots movement.

 

Sounds more like the SEIU. They came out to Arlen Specter's town hall meeting on healthcare in 2009 and admitted that they were paid to attend. Didn't really matter we out numbered them by at least a thousand anyway.

Mon, 07/02/2012 - 20:55 | 2582301 CrockettAlmanac.com
CrockettAlmanac.com's picture

 

 

The problem is not that some people have more money to back their candidate... are you kidding me?  That's EXACTLY the problem.

 

Government exists in order to funnel wealth to those in power. Government takes from producers and gives to non-producers in exchange for votes but keeps the bulk of what it skims from productive individuals for itself and its cronies. You can tie yourself up in knots trying to find a way to make that system work "fairly" for the "common man" or you can seek solutions that go to the root of the problem.

 

 

Mon, 07/02/2012 - 22:11 | 2582448 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

If it is not the lieing sack of shit.....

For those interested, I recommend people pick up the action here  in the ZH blog 2582240

Mon, 07/02/2012 - 22:49 | 2582516 CrockettAlmanac.com
CrockettAlmanac.com's picture

Yes, everyone toddle on over and watch Flakmeister refuse to tell me why he defends Dr. Stephen Schneider who says that it is necessary for scientists to lie about climate change in order to be effective.

 

Here's the quote which Flakmeister has defended. Upon hearing Dr. Schneider's words does one feel more or less willing to take his assessment of climate change seriously? Is it reasonable for Dr. Schneider to encourage other scientists to voice frightening exaggerations regarding what is supposedly science?

 

On the one hand, as scientists we are ethically bound to the scientific method, in effect promising to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but — which means that we must include all the doubts, the caveats, the ifs, ands, and buts. On the other hand, we are not just scientists but human beings as well. And like most people we’d like to see the world a better place, which in this context translates into our working to reduce the risk of potentially disastrous climatic change. To do that we need to get some broadbased support, to capture the public’s imagination. That, of course, entails getting loads of media coverage. So we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we might have. This ‘double ethical bind’ we frequently find ourselves in cannot be solved by any formula. Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest. I hope that means being both. -- Dr. Stephen Schneider, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (Quoted in Discover, pp. 45–48, Oct. 1989.)

Mon, 07/02/2012 - 23:33 | 2582633 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

Quit being a weasel, it only makes you look worse...

You go around proclaiming a conspiracy of lies using edited and ficticious quotes. Who is the one lieing and playing party to a conspiracy?

You cannot debate the science, I doubt you can even understand it. And still you claim that it is lies...That is either Dunning-Kruger or an incredible narcissism fueled hubris....  

You are guilty of everything you claim to be against... Show me that you held people like Pilmer, Spencer and Lindzen, not to mention the political types, to the same level of scrutiny/  You can't and that makes you a hypocrite....

You are no better than a Judas.... except you aren't even being paid....

How does it feel to be useful pawn of oligarchs like the Kochs?

Tue, 07/03/2012 - 00:00 | 2582665 CrockettAlmanac.com
CrockettAlmanac.com's picture

Why don't you just answer the question?

Why should scientists consider lying about global warming in order to be "effective" as Dr. Stephen Schneider of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change suggested? Does such a suggestion make Dr. Schneider and his colleagues appear to be more or less trustworthy? Isn't Dr. Schneider's call for frightening the populace with exaggerated scenarios antithetical to the spirit of good science?

 

 

On the one hand, as scientists we are ethically bound to the scientific method, in effect promising to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but — which means that we must include all the doubts, the caveats, the ifs, ands, and buts. On the other hand, we are not just scientists but human beings as well. And like most people we’d like to see the world a better place, which in this context translates into our working to reduce the risk of potentially disastrous climatic change. To do that we need to get some broadbased support, to capture the public’s imagination. That, of course, entails getting loads of media coverage. So we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we might have. This ‘double ethical bind’ we frequently find ourselves in cannot be solved by any formula. Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest. I hope that means being both. -- Dr. Stephen Schneider, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (Quoted in Discover, pp. 45–48, Oct. 1989.)

Tue, 07/03/2012 - 04:17 | 2582914 LowProfile
LowProfile's picture

Tell him to stick this up his ass http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.com/ as that's clearly that's where his brain resides.

Tue, 07/03/2012 - 09:06 | 2583332 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

Look what the cat dragged in... another narcissist asshole...

You have already demonstrated your credientials on Peak Oil and AGW, i.e. none, so why don't you go play in the traffic or masterbate to a Rothbard blog....

Mon, 07/02/2012 - 22:46 | 2582533 jeff montanye
jeff montanye's picture

"government exists in order to funnel wealth to those in power."  true and not true.  government through education, scientific research, roads, electrical and water infrastructure, just enforcement of just laws makes the powerless richer and the powerful richer as well.  look at history; we are at a time of greatest income inequality, greatest imperial overreach and greatest legal capitulation to the police state in what is, in fact, peacetime.  it wasn't always thus and it won't always be thus.

Mon, 07/02/2012 - 23:03 | 2582570 CrockettAlmanac.com
CrockettAlmanac.com's picture

"This American government — what is it but a tradition, though a recent one, endeavoring to transmit itself unimpaired to posterity, but each instant losing some of its integrity? It has not the vitality and force of a single living man; for a single man can bend it to his will. It is a sort of wooden gun to the people themselves. But it is not the less necessary for this; for the people must have some complicated machinery or other, and hear its din, to satisfy that idea of government which they have. Governments show thus how successfully men can be imposed on, even impose on themselves, for their own advantage. It is excellent, we must all allow. Yet this government never of itself furthered any enterprise, but by the alacrity with which it got out of its way. It does not keep the country free. It does not settle the West. It does not educate. The character inherent in the American people has done all that has been accomplished; and it would have done somewhat more, if the government had not sometimes got in its way. For government is an expedient by which men would fain succeed in letting one another alone; and, as has been said, when it is most expedient, the governed are most let alone by it. Trade and commerce, if they were not made of India rubber,  would never manage to bounce over the obstacles which legislators are continually putting in their way; and, if one were to judge these men wholly by the effects of their actions, and not partly by their intentions, they would deserve to be classed and punished with those mischievous persons who put obstructions on the railroads." -- Thoreau

 

Tue, 07/03/2012 - 04:37 | 2582925 TWSceptic
TWSceptic's picture

His point is, if you take away the power of government, it doesn't matter how much money someone has and can use to promote the person he likes. It's government which is always at the source of the problem, not money or people with money.

Tue, 07/03/2012 - 06:59 | 2583023 dolly madison
dolly madison's picture

I think the problem is the dictatorship and the campaign contributions  Yes, there are evil men with plans to control our country by carrot and stick, but there are also evil men in Washington who go after industries to make sure that industry pays. 

So, I still think the only solution is more power to the people; participatory democracy at the federal level so that we can veto the crappy laws and fire the corrupt politicians.

Mon, 07/02/2012 - 18:18 | 2581960 Widowmaker
Widowmaker's picture

Puhlease, criminal offenses undergo an implicit means test.  1% no charges, everyone else enjoy punishment for being "poor" or whatever the flava of the day portends.

Don't be coy, incorporated lawlessness is your god.

Mon, 07/02/2012 - 18:56 | 2582042 Dburn
Dburn's picture

I'll bet eBay already set it up so members of the "club" only could participate. In house auction.

Mon, 07/02/2012 - 18:19 | 2581967 lordbyroniv
lordbyroniv's picture

Agreed.

 

Left wing garbage.

 

No mention of Soros!?!?!?

Mon, 07/02/2012 - 18:37 | 2581994 Convervative Co...
Convervative Connection's picture

Don't you all understand?

When unions, especially public-sector unions funded completely by tax dollars, use compulsory member dues to fund campaign donations, that's "Democracy in action".

When private citizens use their own money and money freely given by other private citizens, that's "Evil incarnate".

 

Mon, 07/02/2012 - 18:47 | 2582018 LawsofPhysics
LawsofPhysics's picture

That's a good sheep. Didn't notice that the same banks and financial house that got obama elected in 2008 are now supporting Romney.  I don't know about you but as a "private citizen" I paid over 40% in income tax last year, now what did General Electric (a private citizen-according to you and the law) pay again?  Zero.

Thanks for beliving you still have a choice moron.

Ron Paul 2012, I will write him in and sleep well, no wonder the U.S.S.A ia where is is, fucking idiot sheep.

why is the judical arm even deling with this shit?  How about prosecuting the fucking fraud amd restoring the rule of law and contracts?  Stupid fucking sheep.

Mon, 07/02/2012 - 19:12 | 2582081 GernB
GernB's picture

He has a point, that the scales were tipped in favor of public sector unions who can donate to elect the people who they negotiate with. This gives them a one-sided ability to expand the size and power of government. In some states public sector unions are the largest single contributor to candidates who will expand government further to grow the base of people who donate to get them elected.

I'd rather that niether unions nor corporations be allowed to donate to political causes. The people in a union are perfectly capable of exercizing thier free speech rights without having them extracted from them in the form of dues. The owners of corporations are also capable of speaking for thrmselves. Let the people speak, not corporations and not unions.

Mon, 07/02/2012 - 19:50 | 2582161 LawsofPhysics
LawsofPhysics's picture

And tell us, what percentage of the entire tax-paying work force is unionized?  You dumb mother fucking sheep.

Unions are all but dead in most states.  Kill them off, fine with me.  Then what will be the excuse?  Also see baldski's response below moron.

Wed, 07/04/2012 - 20:47 | 2587766 GernB
GernB's picture

If i want union and corporate money out of politics that makes me sheep. Sorry but you are dillusional if you think supporting a corrupt system makes you the one with a true bead on things. You dont like corporate corruption, but union corruption is just fine by you. Supporting the form of corruption that alligns with your ideology only strengthens the power elite that has you brainwashed.

Mon, 07/02/2012 - 22:52 | 2582550 Totentänzerlied
Totentänzerlied's picture

How about prosecuting the fucking fraud amd restoring the rule of law and contracts?

LOL, how about coming back to reality, where we know such things are figments of childrens' imaginations?

Being delusional is no excuse for being abusive.

Mon, 07/02/2012 - 19:48 | 2582178 baldski
baldski's picture

Convervative: You, my friend are full of shit!

As a former "Union Thug", I can tell you, it is against the law to use dues to fund campaigns. Campaigns are funded by voluntary member donations, not dues. Quit spreading wingnut bullshit!

Are stockholders asked to approve corporate campaign donations? Hell no, Why not?

 

Mon, 07/02/2012 - 20:28 | 2582258 Unique Snowflake
Unique Snowflake's picture

"Against the law"......aaaahahahaha. Thank for my morning laugh.

Mon, 07/02/2012 - 22:44 | 2582529 MiguelitoRaton
MiguelitoRaton's picture

My wife is in the teacher's union. They fund liberal candidates with "union funds" which all come from members like her and she has NO ability to decline to participate. I don't know what the law says, but those are the facts.

Wed, 07/04/2012 - 21:00 | 2587772 GernB
GernB's picture

Sorry but thats a load of crap. Its like saying Social Security is a trust fund so congress cant use the funds. Most people would assume volentary means you must opt into the system, not take steps to opt out. Even so, why is it necessary to have the coercive power of unions behind donations of thier members. Are the members incapable of donating themselves?

Mon, 07/02/2012 - 22:19 | 2582471 Dburn
Dburn's picture

When Corporations are using Shareholders money to influence politics without their permission, you think that's Democracy?

Go back to your Human Resources office  sheep. It's obvious your not cut out for this shit.

Mon, 07/02/2012 - 18:41 | 2582004 blunderdog
blunderdog's picture

How is equating money to speech any kind of left/right thing AT ALL?

That's just bullshit.  Bullshit doesn't have a political bias--it's everywhere.

If the exact same video had been created solely to make fun of the massive amount of free-speech controlled by Soros, you'd be a supporter?

Forget the message.  It's all about the messenger. 

Mon, 07/02/2012 - 18:50 | 2582026 LawsofPhysics
LawsofPhysics's picture

Correct, pay no attention to the fact that the money handlers own the legislative and judical branches of government and are freely commiting fraud and dancing on the constitution.  Worry about the left/right false paradigm.  Fucking sheep.

Mon, 07/02/2012 - 22:35 | 2582505 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

As far as tactics and their corporate relationships and what have you, there is no difference. It is the nature of the beast.

However, on social issues, ironically, true freedom, there is a clear difference and let us not kid ourselves...But I agree in that you could purge 80% of the bastards in each party that are cut out of the same sociopathic cloth...

Mon, 07/02/2012 - 18:46 | 2582015 ACP
ACP's picture

Very left-leaning, yes. But every once in a while a codpiece has to be thrown out there...

Mon, 07/02/2012 - 18:02 | 2581910 Freewheelin Franklin
Freewheelin Franklin's picture

Anarchy, bitchez.

 

(edit)

 

Anarcho-Capitalism, bitchez.

Mon, 07/02/2012 - 17:56 | 2581919 cjhoward71
cjhoward71's picture

Stupid video by a libtard subversive

Mon, 07/02/2012 - 18:37 | 2581990 AchtungAffen
AchtungAffen's picture

TERRORISSTTTT AARRRHRGGHGHH

Mon, 07/02/2012 - 17:58 | 2581923 Skateboarder
Skateboarder's picture

Dio was right all along... we are all just minions slaving away for the wizard to build his tower. Some day we may go home. Not now, but one day we will see a real rainbow rising.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x7JsMEsCFZs

p.s. the video was slightly unbearable.

Mon, 07/02/2012 - 20:44 | 2582277 dark pools of soros
dark pools of soros's picture

all Dio videos are pure truth and holy

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!