It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

GOP's Corporate Masters Wish-List of Deregulation

page: 1
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 7 2011 @ 02:03 PM
link   
GOP's Corporate Masters Wish-List of Deregulation

Newly emboldened as chair of the House's key investigative committee, Congressman Darrell Issa, a conservative California Republican, this week sent letters to more than 150 business lobby groups, asking them to identify government rules that they want eliminated

Issa wants to hand the government over to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and a who's who of corporate America. The new Republican Congress is their opportunity to get rid of those pesky environmental laws, consumer product safety laws, and even rules to prevent another Wall Street financial train wreck.

Issa plans to hold hearings of his Oversight and Government Reform Committee to explore how he can help corporate America rid itself of "burdensome government regulations." According to Politico, Issa asked businesses, including Duke Energy, FMC Corp., Toyota and Bayer, to supply him with their wish lists. He also sent letters to industry lobby groups including the American Petroleum Institute, National Association of Manufacturers (NAM), the Association of American Railroads, the National Petrochemical & Refiners Association (NPRA) and entities representing health care and telecommunication providers.


www.theworldforum.net...


edit on 7-1-2011 by Janky Red because: format

edit on 7-1-2011 by Janky Red because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 7 2011 @ 02:11 PM
link   
Funny...I don't remember the lobbiest party winning any seats. I guess I need to pay more attention to elections...I thought it was small gub-ment republicans and smart gub-ment democrats that were running.


Shows you what I know.

Anyhow, it was nice of that lady to ask the lobbiests how they want their america to run.

Corporations are people also ya know! (due to a supreme court ruling making them people of course)..they are just..better..people than you or me.



posted on Jan, 7 2011 @ 02:14 PM
link   
reply to post by Janky Red
 


I think this is absolutely amazing considering ALL the rhetoric we have been hearing for the last year in a half.

Does anyone find this ethical???


Is this what the founding fathers intended folks?



posted on Jan, 7 2011 @ 02:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by SaturnFX
Funny...I don't remember the lobbiest party winning any seats. I guess I need to pay more attention to elections...I thought it was small gub-ment republicans and smart gub-ment democrats that were running.


Shows you what I know.

Anyhow, it was nice of that lady to ask the lobbiests how they want their america to run.

Corporations are people also ya know! (due to a supreme court ruling making them people of course)..they are just..better..people than you or me.


It was called the TEA Party

You would think people would have the sense to rally when something like this happens...

Only in America do you have people rally to get something like this to happen...

Ethics are long dead

and watch the patriotical silence on this thread


"SILENCE IS APPROVAL"


edit on 7-1-2011 by Janky Red because: Fascist progressive lol lol lol



posted on Jan, 7 2011 @ 02:20 PM
link   
I think its high time that corporations simply form their own party...they may actually do well.

Run America on a corporatist platform, making every single law and amendment little more than a corporate restructuring to better increase the profit margains of the main shareholders of America.

I mean, don't hide behind a political party...just come out in the open and do it already...at least lets see the full form of the devil we serve verses put a political mask on it. There is something to be said for honesty, even if it is a grim truth.



posted on Jan, 7 2011 @ 02:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by SaturnFX
I think its high time that corporations simply form their own party...they may actually do well.

Run America on a corporatist platform, making every single law and amendment little more than a corporate restructuring to better increase the profit margains of the main shareholders of America.

I mean, don't hide behind a political party...just come out in the open and do it already...at least lets see the full form of the devil we serve verses put a political mask on it. There is something to be said for honesty, even if it is a grim truth.


Well this is how it works -

The GOP is already acting "liberal"

disown the unsavory stuff and pass it on...

Then our corporat... I mean freedom foot solders here pretend they were against it all along.



posted on Jan, 7 2011 @ 02:29 PM
link   
Where are all the Patriots, TEA partyiers and constitutionalists?


three dollar billz!



posted on Jan, 7 2011 @ 02:30 PM
link   
Yeah, whom would I ask if I was going to check on what should be done to increase employment?

Now this is a tough one. Let me think..........................I am leaning towards tenured professors at Ivy League Colleges that have NEVER RUN a business of their own. Let me think about it a little more......................I have reconsidered. I am now thinking life long government bureaucrats that have NEVER RUN a business..................let me think about for a little bit......................I have reconsidered. I am now leaning towards asking Communist dictators in other countries.......................let me think about it. Now this idea has promise, we can just kill off a bunch of peeps and cut down on the unemployed, maybe a little starvation here and there, then every thing would be great!




posted on Jan, 7 2011 @ 02:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by saltheart foamfollower
Yeah, whom would I ask if I was going to check on what should be done to increase employment?

Now this is a tough one. Let me think..........................I am leaning towards tenured professors at Ivy League Colleges that have NEVER RUN a business of their own. Let me think about it a little more......................I have reconsidered. I am now thinking life long government bureaucrats that have NEVER RUN a business..................let me think about for a little bit......................I have reconsidered. I am now leaning towards asking Communist dictators in other countries.......................let me think about it. Now this idea has promise, we can just kill off a bunch of peeps and cut down on the unemployed, maybe a little starvation here and there, then every thing would be great!



I can't believe you - You are FOR everything and against EVERYTHING depending on who does it -


I though this is what was so horrible about the Mccain Feingold bill, just two days ago...

Hey but we can make an exception because it is Foams party doing - if Foams supports it is cool cause he is
so constitutional in his brain!!!

Some pigs are more equal



Hey and lets

ask TOYOTA They are an American company!

Toyota Motor Corporation (Japanese: トヨタ自動車株式会社 Toyota Jidōsha Kabushiki-gaisha)



posted on Jan, 7 2011 @ 03:00 PM
link   
Re institute complete individual property ownership and I would care not one iota what corporations did. I would care if the government favored one corporation over another corporation, just as I would care if the government favors corporations over self proprietorships.

The problems are NOT the corporations. The problem is the regulations that favor the corporations. Sorry, huge corporations that institute limiting settlements and fines for criminal behavior is what the liberals should be focusing on. Not increasing even more draconian regulations.

Tell me, how did that Oil spill go? Or how bout all the corporations in the banking scandal? Oh, let us just forget about that, that does not play to the narrative. That the government is the enforcer for the corporations. Sorry, no enforcer, no big bad corporations.

In this argument of the chicken and the egg, the government comes before the corporation.

All one would have to do is enforce criminal and civil punishment against those in corporations.

But no, let us argue that we have to make it even HARDER for anyone to start a company or compete with the crony corps. Let us keep going down the WRONG road.



posted on Jan, 7 2011 @ 03:26 PM
link   
reply to post by saltheart foamfollower
 


Smedley Burlap's memorable fable

'GOP's Corporate Masters Wish-List of Deregulation'
Colour by Technicolor

JankyRed: State and corporations should not mix!
Saltheart: OH YEAH AND WHAT'S THE ALTERNATIVE, COMMIE
JankyRed: Foreign corporations are interfering in American politics!
Saltheart: OH SO YOU WANT TO MAKE IT IMPOSSIBLE TO START A BUSINESS

~thus proceeds the failure of American political discourse~



posted on Jan, 7 2011 @ 03:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Janky Red
 


You raise a good point. The TEA party seems to have vanished overnight. When the midterm elections ended, all TEA party activity on ATS ended.

Now, I am not so deluded as to think that every TEA partier on this site was a paid public relations agent. I am certain that some of them were. The majority were very likely riled up by the corporate-controlled news media as they deliberately put out stories to 'appeal' to the 'conservative base.' By appeal I obviously mean 'cater to their prejudices and ideological programs.' Now that the elections are over and the GOP got what it wanted, it no longer needs to cater to the TEA party and it no longer needs the media's help manipulating that section of the electorate into voting for the corrupt party system, expecting change, again.



posted on Jan, 7 2011 @ 03:46 PM
link   
Wow, ad homs and strawmen Smedley, at least you do not disappoint.

Going to accuse me of being a paid provocateur next?



posted on Jan, 7 2011 @ 03:54 PM
link   
reply to post by saltheart foamfollower
 


I don't see where I used ad hominem attacks or strawman arguments. Please point them out to me.

I think that you work pro bono
. You're very passionate about spreading partisan misinformation but I doubt that you would be recruited to do so professionally.



posted on Jan, 7 2011 @ 04:27 PM
link   
reply to post by SmedleyBurlap
 


OH YEAH AND WHAT'S THE ALTERNATIVE, COMMIE

Hmmmm, do you KNOW WHAT A STRAW MAN IS?

From Wikipedia-

A straw man argument is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position.[1] To "attack a straw man" is to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by substituting it with a superficially similar yet unequivalent proposition (the "straw man"), and refuting it, without ever having actually refuted the original position.

Hmmmm, do you KNOW WHAT AN AD HOMINEM IS?

From here-www.nizkor.org...

Description of Ad Hominem

Translated from Latin to English, "Ad Hominem" means "against the man" or "against the person."

An Ad Hominem is a general category of fallacies in which a claim or argument is rejected on the basis of some irrelevant fact about the author of or the person presenting the claim or argument. Typically, this fallacy involves two steps. First, an attack against the character of person making the claim, her circumstances, or her actions is made (or the character, circumstances, or actions of the person reporting the claim). Second, this attack is taken to be evidence against the claim or argument the person in question is making (or presenting). This type of "argument" has the following form:

1. Person A makes claim X.
2. Person B makes an attack on person A.
3. Therefore A's claim is false.

Just for your knowledge, the whole comment was an Ad Hominem.

Thanks for playing Saltheart Foamfollowers school on fallacies.

Please just give me a call when you need any other instructions.

Just a question, when the people really do not own the property they possess, when they are forced to continually pay for the privilage of possessing that property, what form of production would that be called in your view. I really want to know your thinking here.



posted on Jan, 7 2011 @ 04:40 PM
link   
reply to post by saltheart foamfollower
 


That post was a satire, if it hadn't been exaggerated then it would have been of no use.

Your posts have been non-sequiturs, another logical fallacy. Your first post in this thread is a fine example. Who said anything about employment before you entered the thread? Why did you go off on that (obviously intended to be satirical) tangent about communism? I mean, it doesn't really follow that you would satirise people for promoting communism, not in this thread. The previous posts had been critical of the merger or state and corporation, and communism is the perfection of that merger. Who, exactly, was your first post in this thread a response to?

Why did I respond the way I did? I have said it before, but aggressive, hostile, misdirected rhetoric is contributing o the breakdown of peaceful and civil political discussion. Also, as has been pointed out by JankyRed, partisan hackery goes against serious discussion of issues that bridge party lines, like corporatism.



posted on Jan, 7 2011 @ 06:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Janky Red
 


Not all deregulation is bad Janky. Just as not all regulation is good.

Sound regulation the maintains a level playing field is what is needed. The thing is that the politicians (both left/right) use regulation to pay back some political debt. But this is what we get with a country ran by Bureaucratic Rule rather than Rule of Law.



posted on Jan, 7 2011 @ 07:37 PM
link   
reply to post by SmedleyBurlap
 


I thought my first comment was quite relevant. Whom are you going to ask on how to improve the economy.

I then brought into the comment the fact that Obama surrounded himself with Ivy League professors that have not had one iota of experience.

Would that not be relevant to the discussion? Not in your warped mind.

Then I brought into the argument on improving the economy by bringing in lifelong bureaucrats, you know, like the new chief of staff, Daley.

Would that be relevant the the discussion, especially since he was a former commerce secretary, worked for JPMorgan, blah blah blah.

Then I brought up another solution.

Just because you cannot understand my thought processes, sometimes they are flighty-but usually quite relevant to the discussion, does not mean they are non-sequiturs.

See, when one thinks or contemplates vast numbers of possibilities, someone not looking into the meanings behind the examples given, would think they would not be relevant. Of course they would be WRONG.


Tell you what, next time I will include a better description in a U2U message for your eyes only.

I completely agree with your comment regarding partisan hackery. Kinda like what this OP was, an attack based upon pure ideological tenets.

Hey, like I said in the first comment.

Who should we talk to about economics?



Maybe we can call back the Ivy League Professors that ran for the hills. How bout the new genuis Goolsby or the Bankster Daley.

Heck, why not bring in some more Goldman Sachs type folks huh? Maybe Monsanto next?

Sorry, they were already included into the Food Bill that was just passed. Wonder if that is going to have unintended consequences also. You know, like the health care job killing monstrosity.

Want to get all accusatory, maybe you should delve a little deeper into things and not attempt to use hyperbole.



posted on Jan, 7 2011 @ 09:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by ownbestenemy
reply to post by Janky Red
 


Not all deregulation is bad Janky. Just as not all regulation is good.

Sound regulation the maintains a level playing field is what is needed. The thing is that the politicians (both left/right) use regulation to pay back some political debt. But this is what we get with a country ran by Bureaucratic Rule rather than Rule of Law.


Agreed!!! 100%

So why is this guy sending Amazon Wish lists to entities that virtually rule the market places here??

IF this guys had sent out the same brib-back list to a cross section of business's operated by sole proprietors I
would not be so pissed, but he did not do that did he...

All this talk about the Constitution, Thomas Jefferson Quotes, basic equality and freedom...

Ownbest' can you tell me with certainty that this guy will not be swayed by foreign interests or governments for that matter? You cannot, he is supposed to represent us, not disembodied corporate entities...

I think you should give my entity the power to lend Trillions of dollars I do not have and then allow me to sell and insure the resulting contracts against the entire labor based real earnings economy. CHECK, been there done that...

Do you understand the knowledge and knowhow these ventures have???

It is like dropping the soap on purpose and then taking three hours to pick it up... oh wait... and then being angry
with the results



posted on Jan, 7 2011 @ 10:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by saltheart foamfollower
Kinda like what this OP was, an attack based upon pure ideological tenets.



Foam are you impersonating a moron or what???

You have been twating on about Fascist government and BIG government for two $#@$@# years and POOF -

"False alarm folks, I over reacted, I spent hundreds of hour on ATS and I realize I support exactly what I have been fighting against"

Constitutions, rattle snakes, Jefferson... BS

Against the man... being against his own rhetoric, time and work -


edit on 7-1-2011 by Janky Red because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics


active topics

 
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join