Surprise, surprise but to do the same thing to a Corporation is a violation of their right to free speech. Republicans are a minority. In order to maintain control and continue to make war and steal they need gerrymandering, corrupt Courts, and rigged voting machines. All these elements are in place for another fraudulent victory.

to do the same thing to a Corporation is a violation of their right to free speech.

Posted by nutcase at 2007-06-15 11:32 PM | Reply

Corporations do not own labor unions. What the hell are you trying to talk about? Sounds like your standard F-7, all purpose response.

Press F-3 so we can see your regurgitated Bush bash.

"Corporations do not own labor unions. What the hell are you trying to talk about?"

This ruling makes Unions ask their members before spending any money on political causes. No such rule exists where corporations must get the okay from their shareholoders to do the same.

err danforth if a shareholder dont like what a corporation does he/she can divest him/her self of said interest in that corporation,.,,,,can a worker in that same corporation say that?

So much for majority rule. Righties say they believe in it except when it might benefit labor. And Cheka's point is silly because a person can quit a union just as a person can sell a stock. The one might sacrifice a job which provides income but the other might sacrifice profit which is also income. It seems that what is good for the goose is not also good for the gander in our corporate controlled world.

The one might sacrifice a job which provides income but the other might sacrifice profit which is also income.

Danni, To compare owning stock in a corportion like google or McDonald to being a member of the ironworkers union or the teamsters is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.

Do you actually believe that it is just as easy to change one's entire profession as it is to change stock investments?

"And Cheka's point is silly because a person can quit a union just as a person can sell a stock. The one might sacrifice a job which provides income but the other might sacrifice profit which is also income."

DANNI...you are SOOOO freakin' stupid. Do you experience a flash of pain every time your brain experiences a fart like that? How in hell can you compare those two actions? Quit a union, you lose your job, you have your house foreclosed, you end up on the street, homeless maybe. Your family suffers, you end up on welfare...You sell a stock, you get a profit or loss, no loss of job, no foreclosure etc. etc. Geeeze, DANNI, quit smokin' whatever it is you're smokin'.

"can a worker in that same corporation say that?"
Posted by cheka

Of course they can. Slavery was outlawed decades ago.

"if a shareholder dont like what a corporation does he/she can divest him/her self of said interest in that corporation"

But you're comparing apples and oranges. To make it apples and apples, make the corporations get okays from every investor before making political contributions. If labor must get a proactive thumbs-up, why not treat the corporations equally?

Politics-decision has nothing to do with interpretation of laws or past rulings

Harrier,

wtf?

Vernon,

You made a correct statement, "Corporations do not own Unions". What has that got to do with the fact that the Courts have once more tilted politics in favor of Corporations.

Courts have decided that Corporations can spend any amount of money on any issue they want, since these non-living entities which squirrel away the worlds cash for generations have the same legal rights guaranteed by the Constitution as human beings, including the right to free speech.

The hurdle to get every Union Member to support political donations might as well be the moon. Conditional refunding of membership dues is analagous to permitting everyone who makes over $1 million a year to opt out of Social Security and Income Tax, (which is also done). Corporations are not saddled with
these impediments.

Twisted legal logic is giving everything away to Capital. Who do Judges golf with? All the solvent co-conspirators in the Enron debacle are on the verge of getting a free ride from corrupt Courts. This is madness, we are descending into third world ways.

Unions are supposed to represent the interests of their constituent workers. Corporations are supposed to represent the interests of their stockholders. But, neither is Democratic in any effective sense, any more than our Country. It not completely Undemocratic either, its just that the more money you have the more your vote counts. That's not the way our founders intended.

Unions and Corporations represent opposing interests in a fight over guess what, money? Care to wager over whose side Scalia and Bush are on?

Maybe we can get a law passed like this that requires politicians to ask EVERY one of their voters for permission to spend money to go to war, and refund the taxes to each one who says no?
What's 2 trillion divided by 100,000,000?

What Cheka and anti-union folk really do is construct arguments designed to eliminate any possibility of a union actually becoming powerful enough to produce change in the labor/management relationship. By pretending outrage over the individual's right to have their union support ideas not necessarily agreed to by the total membership they actually make an argument against many other bodies of political power such as political parties, professional organizations, religious organizations, etc. It is not a coincidence that anti-union people choose only to concern theirselves with the rights of the individual in situations where collective unity brings that same individual more power and thus more income. The minority in these situations gladly accept the benefits of collective bargaining but then try to cripple their own union's ability to support politicians who will make that possible or increase the power of the union to bring change benefiting workers. They are the worst fools, those who demand the right to be powerless pawns for the employer to treat as he sees fit.

You can all cry "unjust!" until you are blue in the face.

Fact is, this law is Constitutional, and the court unanimously regarded it as such.

JJ,

Every head the Saudis and King George chopped off, every heretic the Catholic Church burned alive or tortured to death, every Jew Hitler gassed, every witch we burned, almost every nigger we lynched was done "legally". SO WHAT.

Fact is, this law is Constitutional, and the court unanimously regarded it as such.

Posted by JeffJ at 2007-06-17 12:58 PM | Reply


With this court, who gives a fuck. The most anti American court since Dred Scott. Filled with clowns and morons who have no concept or love of America Constitution. Owned by the corporations and Bush'S HANDLERS. Impossible to own the court?
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA