It's official: A Corporation is running for Congress!

page: 3
72
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 29 2010 @ 08:28 PM
link   
reply to post by timewalker
 


That's what I was looking for..
Thanks.




posted on Jan, 29 2010 @ 08:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by whaaa
I'll bet that Above Top Secret is incorporated. Perhaps they would take the members in as partners [for a small fee of course] we could be publicly traded on the big boards and be a force to be reckoned with.

I can see it now....Sen. ATS Rep. BTS

It cost nothing to dream BIG


Christ! I should have thought of that...



posted on Jan, 29 2010 @ 08:33 PM
link   
You know it probably is not a bad idea to let a corporation be in Congress. At least they would not be trying to go bankrupt the way the crappola that is Congress now is doing.



posted on Jan, 29 2010 @ 08:34 PM
link   
All that I can say is: please have you gold and silver puchased!
Also, buy some perls!

[edit on 29-1-2010 by misfitofscience]



posted on Jan, 29 2010 @ 08:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by arbiture

Originally posted by whaaa
I'll bet that Above Top Secret is incorporated. Perhaps they would take the members in as partners [for a small fee of course] we could be publicly traded on the big boards and be a force to be reckoned with.

I can see it now....Sen. ATS Rep. BTS

It cost nothing to dream BIG


Christ! I should have thought of that...



Yeah, think how much fun our campaigns could be with all the diverse crazies, malcontents, and beautiful women. We could spiral into debauchery so fast it would make your head swim.

dibs on the beer concession


[edit on 29-1-2010 by whaaa]



posted on Jan, 29 2010 @ 08:49 PM
link   
so.. who / what will be actually SITTING in congress?

some robotic animatronic waving / smiling type thing that the CEO can use a voice-changer and speak through remotely?

things are getting eeeeriee...

-



posted on Jan, 29 2010 @ 08:54 PM
link   
Oh dear. I just got a flash of the Jack in the box guy from the old commercials in his business suit sitting in the congress seat.



posted on Jan, 29 2010 @ 08:56 PM
link   
LOL!

Nope! That's not how the NWO/Corporations want it to be. Better to rule behind puppets and let the string dependents take the rap when things go wrong.

The SCOTUS only ruled on campaigned funds, not eligibility to stand for presidency. Notice the difference.

NWO/Coporations puppet masters are not supposed to be found out. They have the power and funds to hide behind their mannequins. They have their PR guys to ridicule or take out those who got too close to finding out the truth.

Unfortunately or rather fortunately, with the recent financial crises, the world masses and american masses realized bitterly that someone else other than political figures had massive control over republics and politics, had been pulling the strings and had been messing up big time the lives of common people.

No. These despicable animals will never want the responsibility and accountability to rule. The only way to prevent them from having their way is to deny them the right to create puppets through legislative oversight for transparency and public scrutiny over their own elected representatives.

Failing which, we will only return to jungle rule and jungle laws. No one will be safe and societies risk being annihilated financially or physically by the mistakes of these old fogeys in their over-stuffed chairs directing human affairs, and had miserably since the dawn of civilisation.

We could have evolved much faster, but thanks to them and their mistakes, we end up killing one another, robbing one another and needed someone outside to guide and lead us throughout history, and then whenever the masses are getting well, these rotten power hungry ones come along and destroy everything........



posted on Jan, 29 2010 @ 09:17 PM
link   
Well, the Israeli Lobby already owns the U.S. Congress.

View this documentary:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

So that said, I really see no difference with this change in policy. It would just make lobbyists transparent. AIPAC already owns virtually all of congress and the U.S. government.



posted on Jan, 29 2010 @ 09:29 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jan, 29 2010 @ 10:16 PM
link   
Exactly this is to prove a point. I am LMAO on this latest news bit.

Awesome!

It is proving how naive the Supreme Court is and didn't think things through.

Using their own fire to burn them with.




Originally posted by David9176
reply to post by EnlightenUp
 





Not to be the party pooper or the advocate but I wonder if they just aren't releasing the kracken and wondering just how far it has to go before they do. Maybe they really are trying and scratching their heads, wondering how far they can go, wonder just what it'll take to get the population at large to even wince.


That's what they are trying to do. They are hoping people will take notice and realize how ridiculous the supreme court decision was. They will ride it out all the way if they can. I actually heard the "human representative" , which is what he called himself, for this company in a radio interview. This is to prove a point....like I stated...we'll see how far this goes. Hopefully it will get loads of media attention and people will get outraged....but then again....the media is corporately owned. I bet other corporations are drooling to see if this could be successful.

I hope people find out about this!! It may take a Constitutional amendment to fix it...and that is extremely difficult to do.

[edit on 29-1-2010 by David9176]

[edit on 29-1-2010 by David9176]



posted on Jan, 29 2010 @ 10:50 PM
link   
"It is proving how naive the Supreme Court is ..."

Bwahahaha.

The decision, in essence:

"The Court also threw out the portion of McCain-Feingold that had permitted persons to contribute to Political Action Committees (PACs), but barred those PACs from using those funds in the sixty day period preceding an election. Since that sixty day period preceding the election is the most vital in any campaign, the Court held that the prohibition on expenditures during that time was a violation of the free speech guaranteed to all persons, individually and in groups, by the First Amendment."

Hah. So the Ney York Times Corporation, The Washington Post Corporation, The General Electric Corporation (NBC) all have unfettered political speech, while some schlubs with a PAC are regulated by the courts. This is no longer the case thanks to this decision, and that is why the statist pols (Obama, Schumer) are threatened by it. It ruins their monopoly on the flow of information.

A good day for liberty.



posted on Jan, 29 2010 @ 11:01 PM
link   
reply to post by David9176
 


Great post! Star and Flag.

I'm glad that they are doing this to prove a point. It is sick what the Sup Court did with this ruling.

Freedom of speech is a great thing but everyone knows that it has limitations. Such as the cliche, yelling fire in a crowded theater. And I think a corporation should also be one of those exceptions.

I can see very soon when we will see, Candidate John Doe, brought to you by Fox Broadcasting, Hershey and Disney.

Does anyone know if this ruling applies to the local level of govt? Maybe we the people can use this in our favor. I can go to local businesses and get them to finance my own local campaign. I promise i will wear your Mom and Pop Country Store T-Shirt and hat if you pay for my attack ads.



posted on Jan, 29 2010 @ 11:11 PM
link   
Very few of you (if any) seem to have any idea what this ruling actually does, or which statutes were in dispute.

The corporate media's explanation of the ruling is of course inaccurate and designed to protect the incumbent statists (e.g. Obama, Schumer). So the corporations (media) have riled up the ignorant masses against their smaller corporate competitors who might contribute to political candidates they don't approve of. Heh. Talk about sheeple.



posted on Jan, 29 2010 @ 11:14 PM
link   
Murray Hill Inc. is a progressive PR firm. They are "running for congress" in order to highlight the impact the supreme court's decision could have on political campaigns.

I hope they really do get on the ballot. Talk about shaking things up. Maybe it will spur radical change for the better in the way campaigns are financed.

murrayhillweb.com...

[edit on 29-1-2010 by milesp]

One more edit:

For a good explanation of the supreme court ruling read this...

www.ombwatch.org...

[edit on 29-1-2010 by milesp]



posted on Jan, 29 2010 @ 11:22 PM
link   
Come on guys.

The ruling allows massive amounts of money contributed to campaigns, but they can't buy your vote. And before anyone posts a snarky response, just give some credit to your fellow citizens. We can all think for ourselves. They can advertise all they want, but it's just money. The people can always drum up more than corporate America, if properly motivated. If not, they deserve what they get.

Remember the excitement for Obama when he was campaigning. People thought he was going to pay their rent for God's sake. Corporate money can't buy that kind of following.

Secondly, just because you say corporations have all the same rights as people (which is absurdly incorrect), it doesn't mean they are recognized AS people.

There are plenty of safeguards to keep a corporation from running for office, the simples being the old definition of citizen argument.



posted on Jan, 29 2010 @ 11:32 PM
link   
While the Supreme Court decision is making waves through society, I ponder why no one has mentioned that its not just the "corporation" that we have to fear of being President of the United States.

I ask myself what if that corporation was a mega corporation from the evil empire of China, undemocratic Saudi Arabia, gangster Russia or french fry France or abundant cow India?

Oh well, I sure you get the picture. What if Communist China as a corporation was declared president until our nations debt is paid off ? What if they decide not to honor the debt paid. Would we get our nation back? I think not.

Well, that's one side of the down side. The other side of the down side is that you cant assassinate a corporation and that makes matters a bit more tenuous than most to rid ourselves of the yoke of tyranny.



posted on Jan, 29 2010 @ 11:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by liquidsmoke206
LOL

I have to laugh, this is like a joke.

My only hope is that people can fight fire with fire...I mean...not every corporation is evil. Maybe a good one will run for office that people can get behind.

Even still tho, this seems like an open door to corruption and epic bureaucracy.
On the other hand, maybe it's true, if corporations are buying politicians anyways, maybe it is better to cut out the middle man things become a little more transparent, no?

Well ultimately, if we can accept the fact that our country has literally turned fascist and flushed capitalism down the toilet, then we might as well also accept that corporations will become political giants (as if they weren't already) that can actually hold seats not only in Congress, the Senate, and quite possibly...the Supreme Court.

So, while I agree with you on one point in recognizing the already existing power of corporations, the other point gets shrouded in the acceptance of the first. Here's the second point: We literally just gave away our country to the wealthy and allowed corporations full access to how policy is determined. It's no longer a conspiracy hidden in a mountain of clever lies and denials, this is all out reality. They own us now.

Nonetheless, I do see your initial point and it has merit.



posted on Jan, 29 2010 @ 11:37 PM
link   
I believe that TPTB always make sure that whatever they are going to do is legal. Have a lackey pass a law somewhere that covers their butts. In this case, they must have something big for everyone.



posted on Jan, 29 2010 @ 11:47 PM
link   
Just emailed the local paper for this one. This is the funniest thing ever.





top topics
 
72
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join