Posts Made By: david elosser

"I find it unnerving the court's notion that a corporation or association has the same constitutional rights as a human being."

Corporations do not have rights. The people that run them and that are employed by them have the rights. Our Constitution says Congress shall pass no laws prohibiting free speech or the right to petition Congress. It takes money to do that. In fact, a previous Supreme Court long ago ruled that, basically, money=free speech. The people of any corporation, big or small, has the right to petition Congress on their behalf, and on the behalf of the employees that work there.

David E

According to Gallup:
http://www.gallup.com/poll/125333/Public-Agrees-Court-Campaign-Money-Free-Speech.aspx

And from Jim Brown's post in a related thread, the following diverse groups also agree with the Supreme Court:

Alliance Defense Fund
American Civil Liberties Union
American Civil Rights Union
AFL-CIO
American Justice Partnership
California Broadcasters Association
California First Amendment Coalition
Campaign Finance Scholars
Cato Institute
Center for Competitive Politics
Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence
Committee for Truth in Politics
Foundation for Free Expression
Fidelis Center
Free Speech Defense & Education Fund
Institute for Justice
Judicial Watch
Brief for the Michigan Chamber of Commerce
NRA
Pacific Legal Foundation
Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press
Seven Former Chairmen and One Former Commissioner of the FEC
United States Chamber of Commerce
Wyoming Liberty Group, et al.

David E

This opinion from Jeffery Lean, Britain's longest-serving environmental correspondent, having pioneered reporting on the subject almost 40 years ago:
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/geoffreylean/100023489/pachauri-must-quit-as-head-of-official-science-panel/

David E

Wow! Jethro Bodine did better than that. Goodth ing she's not in charg of yur health cair!

David E

Bad form on Obama's part. Gambling is considered a sin by Muslims.

David E

Darian Rachal said:

Wonder if Olberman is going the way of Air America?

Possibly, but I doubt it. We're looking at an industry that pays Katie Couric $15 mil a year to drag ratings below the gutter. If these liberals' job security depended on their performance none of them would be there. What counts is how liberal they are. Besides, when you compare Olberman with MSNBC's other shining jewels of magnificance, Maddow and Matthews, his ratings are not all that bad.

David E

"Sen. Joseph Biden -Del., Sept 4, 2002 - "If we wait for the danger from Saddham to become clear, it could be too late."

"Sen. Hillary Clinton - NY, Feb 5, 2003 - "Iraq both poses a continuing threat to the national security of the United States and international peace and security in the Persian Gulf region and remains in material and unacceptable breach of its international obligations by, among other things, continuing to possess and develop a significant chemical and biological weapons capability, actively seeking a nuclear weapons capability, and supporting and harboring terrorist organizations."

From College Confidential: (comment) "So Biden sees Iraq as moving toward a stable representative government and is impressed with how they have been using the political process rather than guns to settle their differences. Nowhere else in the Arab world does such movement toward representative democracy exist. And of course we have the Obama administration to thank for this. Not. Actually, Biden did have a role because he voted for the war before he was against it, but both he and Obama were against the surge, which was instrumental along with Sunni awakening in transforming Iraq into what Biden now feels so proud to take credit for. The Iraq war, like most wars, has been very costly in human and monetary terms and there remain many challenges ahead. But, if Biden’s optimism holds true, the historical perspective on Bush’s legacy in Mesopotamia will be very different than the perspective that many hold now."
http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/parent-cafe-election-politics/864303-biden-vindicates-bush-iraq-takes-credit-behalf-obama-administration.html

David E

As if on cue, from Washington Times (Wesley Pruden is editor emeritus of The Washington Times):
"The Red Hot Scam Unravels"
"The global-warming hysteria, on which the Obama administration wants to base enormous new tax burdens, is just about as reliable as the weather hysteria presented nightly on your favorite television channel. Man is driven by his ego and finds it impossible to think even the weather is not all about him."
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/feb/16/pruden-the-red-hot-scam-begins-to-unravel/

David E

I remember 1994. Every liberal pundant in the media called it an "anti-incumbant" movement, in spite of the fact that far fewer Republicans lost their seats than Democrats. I predict the same thing will happen this November.

David E

By itself, no, because tax cuts actually generate more revenue for governments, because tax cuts stimulate economic activity. And anytime there's economic activity, when money changes hands, its taxed. This has been proven time and again. President Kennedy knew this and pushed for across the board tax cuts, and the economic growth during the Ragan period is well documented.

The problem Michael, is that Congress can't control its spending and often follows tax "cuts" with actual stealth increases later on. These stealth increases almost always impact the middle class. The Alternative Minimun Tax (AMT) sucks in millions of new middle class taxpayers every year, for example, so if Congress does nothing about the tax code as it stands, we have automatic middle-class tax increases built in every year.

The "tax cuts" of the stimulus bill were not actually tax cuts, but one-time rebates (e.g. Cash For Clunkers). Even the middle class "tax cut" of 2009 was nothing but a fanagling of the tax tables, and many people (like me, for example) are finding themselves paying some or all of that money back. A true tax cut will be continuous until ammended.

David E