[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

Is it too early for me to declare success in calling the bottom and throw my hat into the Senate race ?

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

Is it too early for me to declare success in calling the bottom and throw my hat into the Senate race ?

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

This is a good example of something that could be handled by an amendment to the constitution.

Unfortunately, you would see opponents to this using their power gained by this ruling to campaign heavily against it.

Remember, we still have not even passed the equal rights amendment. Which seems simple by comparison.
Here are the exact words:
Section 1. Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex.
Section 2. The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.
Section 3. This amendment shall take effect two years after the date of ratification.

Now if we couldn’t get 38 states to pass this, what are the chances on a campaign finance amendment?

** Note: This message funded in part by earnings from evil corporations. opinions are those of FSD and may be reproduced without consent from anyone.

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

This is a good example of something that could be handled by an amendment to the constitution.

Unfortunately, you would see opponents to this using their power gained by this ruling to campaign heavily against it.

Remember, we still have not even passed the equal rights amendment. Which seems simple by comparison.
Here are the exact words:
Section 1. Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex.
Section 2. The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.
Section 3. This amendment shall take effect two years after the date of ratification.

Now if we couldn’t get 38 states to pass this, what are the chances on a campaign finance amendment?

** Note: This message funded in part by earnings from evil corporations. opinions are those of FSD and may be reproduced without consent from anyone.

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

This is a good example of something that could be handled by an amendment to the constitution.

Unfortunately, you would see opponents to this using their power gained by this ruling to campaign heavily against it.

Remember, we still have not even passed the equal rights amendment. Which seems simple by comparison.
Here are the exact words:
Section 1. Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex.
Section 2. The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.
Section 3. This amendment shall take effect two years after the date of ratification.

Now if we couldn’t get 38 states to pass this, what are the chances on a campaign finance amendment?

** Note: This message funded in part by earnings from evil corporations. opinions are those of FSD and may be reproduced without consent from anyone.

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

This is a good example of something that could be handled by an amendment to the constitution.

Unfortunately, you would see opponents to this using their power gained by this ruling to campaign heavily against it.

Remember, we still have not even passed the equal rights amendment. Which seems simple by comparison.
Here are the exact words:
Section 1. Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex.
Section 2. The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.
Section 3. This amendment shall take effect two years after the date of ratification.

Now if we couldn’t get 38 states to pass this, what are the chances on a campaign finance amendment?

** Note: This message funded in part by earnings from evil corporations. opinions are those of FSD and may be reproduced without consent from anyone.

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

This is a good example of something that could be handled by an amendment to the constitution.

Unfortunately, you would see opponents to this using their power gained by this ruling to campaign heavily against it.

Remember, we still have not even passed the equal rights amendment. Which seems simple by comparison.
Here are the exact words:
Section 1. Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex.
Section 2. The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.
Section 3. This amendment shall take effect two years after the date of ratification.

Now if we couldn’t get 38 states to pass this, what are the chances on a campaign finance amendment?

** Note: This message funded in part by earnings from evil corporations. opinions are those of FSD and may be reproduced without consent from anyone.

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

[quote=briansd1]I disagree with the majority ruling.

Corporations are not citizens. They are legal entities that survive in perpetuity.

For you Republican guys out there who agree with the ruling:

1) What if shareholders of a corporation are foreign citizens? In today’s world, foreigners own a big chunk of US businesses.

2) What if the majority of shareholders of a corporation are foreign citizens?[/quote]

I am not a Republican.
But, I have a question related to the above.

Do foreigners have the right to free speech, when in our country ?

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

[quote=briansd1]I disagree with the majority ruling.

Corporations are not citizens. They are legal entities that survive in perpetuity.

For you Republican guys out there who agree with the ruling:

1) What if shareholders of a corporation are foreign citizens? In today’s world, foreigners own a big chunk of US businesses.

2) What if the majority of shareholders of a corporation are foreign citizens?[/quote]

I am not a Republican.
But, I have a question related to the above.

Do foreigners have the right to free speech, when in our country ?

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

[quote=briansd1]I disagree with the majority ruling.

Corporations are not citizens. They are legal entities that survive in perpetuity.

For you Republican guys out there who agree with the ruling:

1) What if shareholders of a corporation are foreign citizens? In today’s world, foreigners own a big chunk of US businesses.

2) What if the majority of shareholders of a corporation are foreign citizens?[/quote]

I am not a Republican.
But, I have a question related to the above.

Do foreigners have the right to free speech, when in our country ?

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

[quote=briansd1]I disagree with the majority ruling.

Corporations are not citizens. They are legal entities that survive in perpetuity.

For you Republican guys out there who agree with the ruling:

1) What if shareholders of a corporation are foreign citizens? In today’s world, foreigners own a big chunk of US businesses.

2) What if the majority of shareholders of a corporation are foreign citizens?[/quote]

I am not a Republican.
But, I have a question related to the above.

Do foreigners have the right to free speech, when in our country ?

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

[quote=briansd1]I disagree with the majority ruling.

Corporations are not citizens. They are legal entities that survive in perpetuity.

For you Republican guys out there who agree with the ruling:

1) What if shareholders of a corporation are foreign citizens? In today’s world, foreigners own a big chunk of US businesses.

2) What if the majority of shareholders of a corporation are foreign citizens?[/quote]

I am not a Republican.
But, I have a question related to the above.

Do foreigners have the right to free speech, when in our country ?

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

[quote=Aecetia]
I also found this prediction that is a bit negative, but worth looking at, but I hope he is wrong about the terror attack:

Gerald Celente predicted a crash in 2010. According to Celente, last year’s economic collapse never hit bottom because government bailouts kept things propped up. To make matters worse this year, there will be a collapse in the commercial real estate market, he continued. Celente anticipates a 9/11 level terrorist attack that banks will use as an excuse to devalue our currency. He suggested people refrain from debt spending, keep some cash on hand, and buy local (American made) products when possible.
Gerald Celente has a knack for getting the zeitgeist right.— USA Today
http://www.trendsresearch.com/
[/quote]

But, if the currency is devalued, wouldn’t debt be effectively reduced in his scenario. If one believed this scenario why wouldn;t he recommend using debt to buy hard assets?

That way, when the currency is devalued, you still have the hard assets (gold, ammo, shelter, land, etc), but the debt (which is based in a specific currency) is also devalued.

Not that I recommend that strategy, since I don;t believe the prediction is likely to come true over the course of 2010.

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

[quote=Aecetia]
I also found this prediction that is a bit negative, but worth looking at, but I hope he is wrong about the terror attack:

Gerald Celente predicted a crash in 2010. According to Celente, last year’s economic collapse never hit bottom because government bailouts kept things propped up. To make matters worse this year, there will be a collapse in the commercial real estate market, he continued. Celente anticipates a 9/11 level terrorist attack that banks will use as an excuse to devalue our currency. He suggested people refrain from debt spending, keep some cash on hand, and buy local (American made) products when possible.
Gerald Celente has a knack for getting the zeitgeist right.— USA Today
http://www.trendsresearch.com/
[/quote]

But, if the currency is devalued, wouldn’t debt be effectively reduced in his scenario. If one believed this scenario why wouldn;t he recommend using debt to buy hard assets?

That way, when the currency is devalued, you still have the hard assets (gold, ammo, shelter, land, etc), but the debt (which is based in a specific currency) is also devalued.

Not that I recommend that strategy, since I don;t believe the prediction is likely to come true over the course of 2010.

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

[quote=Aecetia]
I also found this prediction that is a bit negative, but worth looking at, but I hope he is wrong about the terror attack:

Gerald Celente predicted a crash in 2010. According to Celente, last year’s economic collapse never hit bottom because government bailouts kept things propped up. To make matters worse this year, there will be a collapse in the commercial real estate market, he continued. Celente anticipates a 9/11 level terrorist attack that banks will use as an excuse to devalue our currency. He suggested people refrain from debt spending, keep some cash on hand, and buy local (American made) products when possible.
Gerald Celente has a knack for getting the zeitgeist right.— USA Today
http://www.trendsresearch.com/
[/quote]

But, if the currency is devalued, wouldn’t debt be effectively reduced in his scenario. If one believed this scenario why wouldn;t he recommend using debt to buy hard assets?

That way, when the currency is devalued, you still have the hard assets (gold, ammo, shelter, land, etc), but the debt (which is based in a specific currency) is also devalued.

Not that I recommend that strategy, since I don;t believe the prediction is likely to come true over the course of 2010.

[Author]

Posts