Bernie Sanders Senate Speech: "A Corporation Is NOT A Person" : Constitutional Amendment

Just caught this speech by Bernie Sanders & WOW. Blew me away. This is more of what we need; powerful speeches in opposition to the special interest and their corporate takeover. I support him fully on this. He outlines the method by which Wall St. banks and the wealthy elite influence politics, and that we must end this before America is destroyed internally.

##snip##

December 07, 2011 C-SPAN



Similar petitions/amendments.
##snip##




Terms and Conditions of Use--Please Review

Ah there is someone in Washington that has the truth for the masses. Need more people to see just how warped Corporations are and how much power over the people they really control now.

Great delivery of a great idea, probably well received by all 4 people that were present on the senate floor actually doing their jobs during the time he gave it....

This stuff falls all too often falls on deaf ears and empty seats and that is what also threatens democracy in this country.

Edit: to suggest you pay attention to at all the empty chairs in the room...Good post, S&F OP thanks!

I thought of this waay before I heard it somewhere.
But I heard somneone say, "I will believe a corporation is a person when they execute the first one".
Imagine if we put the boardmembers of BP on a rope for the debacle in the gulf, the next board just might tighten up the ship abit.

I think Bernie Sanders is great! S&F for the OP. I once wrote President Obama and specifically told him that if he were to be challenged by Bernie Sanders in this upcoming election, he (Obama) wouldn't stand a chance and I still believe that today.

I would have loved to see a Bernie Sanders/Elizabeth Warren ticket for POTUS in 2012.

Sadly Bernie is wrong. What he does not understand, and most people don't is that "persons" are corporations. "Persons" are the only body that can vote, humans cannot vote. In order to be a voter you have to be a corporation - person, and this is established by your birth certificate and a very convoluted process I won't go into. But, the CRANKY OLD MAN is a company. What the justices ruled is that all companies are to be treated the same - they were right.

What Bernie should be sponsoring is a bill that says "humans, occupying a body, are not corporations." I'll leave you to discover what that would mean for the human population.

reply to post by Raelsatu


Awesome the petition was added! It's so easy to sign. If I may, I'd like to add this in here too, a way for any American to find and contact their senators to tell them, they too must support this change. This is how it works folks, you exercise your constitutional right by getting your senators to support the amendment change proposed by Senator Sanders. Get these politicians working for you and me.

Call, write, or fill out a form for senators (I've done all three today plus signed the petition): www.senate.gov...

Since ATS lives online, let's get support for this amendment change by flooding our own channels to spread the word.

reply to post by Jason88


Awesome, I'll have to take a look at the form. This is the sort of amendment I can get behind. In light of all the disastrous legislation put forth lately (NDAA, SOPA, PIPA), it's good to see something which has the potential to get recognition. However there's also a disproportional chance that this will be suppressed --- like most other proposed bills serving to reverse damages done by the special interest.

##petitions removed##

15e.) Recruitment/Solicitation:
i) You will not use your membership in the Websites for any type of recruitment to any causes whatsoever. You will not Post, use the chat feature, use videos, or use the private message system to disseminate advertisements, chain letters, petitions, pyramid schemes, or any kind of solicitation for political action, social action, letter campaigns, or related online and/or offline coordinated actions of any kind.

Terms and Conditions of Use

This is just one more example of how stupid our Congresspeople actually are, and this guy is a Senator for Christ's sakes!

It has been Congress, not the Supreme Court, that has defined corporations as a "person", in both the United States Code and the Uniform Commercial Code, but does Senator Sanders want to repeal these definitions? Why certainly not! Instead he wants to create an Amendment for the sole purpose of overturning a Supreme Court decision whose legal reasoning was the First Amendment. In essence, while Senator Sanders has either no interest, or is just largely ignorant, in repealing the statutorily defined corporations as a person, but instead wants to repeal the First Amendment by creating another Amendment that would overturn a Supreme Court ruling that upheld the First Amendment and used that express prohibition on Congress to overturn legislation that was "chilling" speech.

Further, Congress has not only defined corporations as a "person" they have defined individuals as a "person". It really doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand that Congress, in defining corporations as a "person", did so to have regulatory authority over them. Why then has Congress defined individuals as a "person" too, and why are most people fine with this, and so willing to buy into this charade of corporate personhood being anything other than what it is?

It is inexcusable that a Senator has no knowledge of the statutory definitions provided by the legislature he works for. It is beyond inexcusable, it is an outrage!

If all these people praising efforts to create an Amendment to overturn Citizen's United really wanted to reign in corruption of government, they would be demanding that Congress repeal their statutory definitions of both corporations and individuals, and most importantly, if any Amendment is to be proposed it would be an Amendment to prohibit Congress from ever even daring to statutorily define free and independent People who are legally, and lawfully the holders of the inherent political power in this nation, but nooooooooo! No one wants freedom, instead they want their own brand of tyranny.

reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
It has been Congress, not the Supreme Court, that has defined corporations as a "person", in both the United States Code and the Uniform Commercial Code..... In essence, while Senator Sanders has either no interest, or is just largely ignorant, in repealing the statutorily defined corporations as a person, but instead wants to repeal the First Amendment by creating another Amendment that would overturn a Supreme Court ruling that upheld the First Amendment and used that express prohibition on Congress to overturn legislation that was "chilling" speech.

Really??? The same Congress that is bought and sold ---the same Congress that has the highest disapproval rating it has ever had in Americas history --- you're defending them? So you don't have any problem with corporations being able to influence the politicians decision in declaring corporate personhood Constitutional? Where exactly in the First Amendment does it say a handful of amoral, authoritarian monsters have the right to overtake the political process??? Are you really that naive? We clearly don't live in a time where corporations are law-abiding or moral in any sense; yet you defend their "right" to continue buying politicians [figuratively] raping the masses. Free speech does not constitute anonymous oligarchs pouring countless of millions into the political process, and circulating the very corruption they perpetrate.

Further, Congress has not only defined corporations as a "person" they have defined individuals as a "person". It really doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand that Congress, in defining corporations as a "person", did so to have regulatory authority over them. Why then has Congress defined individuals as a "person" too, and why are most people fine with this, and so willing to buy into this charade of corporate personhood being anything other than what it is?

And yet, the Congress is taking money from the WEALTHY ELITE & creating regulations that HELP ONLY THEM. The regulatory structure hurts the middle class & poor. The welfare state redistributes wealth in a manner that destroys the working class & benefits: the military industrial complex, Big pharma, big banks, prison industrial complex, etc. All the while these entities are causing mass mayhem, initiating wars, printing trillions to bail out fellow banking cartels, subsidizing their already disproportional pool of wealth, often paying NEGATIVE taxes, wasting the rest of Americans tax payer dollars, sending weapons over to Mexico to fuel the drug war; and WHO IS TAKING RESPONSIBILITY?? NOBODY. Coporations may be "persons" by your regard, but they're facing no charges for their atrocties and conspiring against humanity; including the DESECRATION of our civil liberties & unalienable [Constitutional] rights.

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
It is inexcusable that a Senator has no knowledge of the statutory definitions provided by the legislature he works for. It is beyond inexcusable, it is an outrage!

If all these people praising efforts to create an Amendment to overturn Citizen's United really wanted to reign in corruption of government, they would be demanding that Congress repeal their statutory definitions of both corporations and individuals, and most importantly, if any Amendment is to be proposed it would be an Amendment to prohibit Congress from ever even daring to statutorily define free and independent People who are legally, and lawfully the holders of the inherent political power in this nation, but nooooooooo! No one wants freedom, instead they want their own brand of tyranny.

I agree our politicians are stupid, and maybe Senator Sanders is too. But, the point of this thread is to draw attention to an actual politician proposing a radical change that many Americans support :Get the corporations out of government. If the senator's target is off, aiming at the Supreme Court with Citizens United vs. FEC, then I say so what. It's the sentiment he is expressing that rings true, the power of his proposed amendment change that will allow ordinary Americans to believe in their government once again.

And that's just it, while you are extremely well informed (I always enjoy your posts), most people are not. This is a simple message, with an easy to sign petition, that empowers people to make a difference. The issues you bring to the table sound very legitimate, but somewhat complex for the average American worker bee to understand. I think the senator is doing the right thing and framing it in a way that all people can participate-in and understand.

You think his target should be congress, but this standalone amendment he wants changed is a lot easier to fix than taking on congress. And as we all know, no one has attention spans any more, so let's stick with something simple at first and see if makes a difference. My two cents.

reply to post by crankyoldman


Perhaps you are correct; but don't mistake this anger for ignorance. In any manner, the sentiment remains that a handful of special interest are running the global economy into the pit, all the while gradually stripping us of our self-respect and human rights. Something needs to be done; even if this amendment needs some revision it's definitely a start.

reply to post by Raelsatu

Really??? The same Congress that is bought and sold ---the same Congress that has the highest disapproval rating it has ever had in Americas history --- you're defending them?

How disingenuous can you be? You ignore my opening statement, which is a scathing indictment on Congresspeople being stupid, then you quote my clear and obvious attack on Congress and deceitfully attempt to frame it as a defense of Congress. Has to make the thinking man wonder what your real agenda is.

Your whole little rant is nothing but lies and deception, and no where did you even dare to address the very real fact that Congress is the culprit in defining corporations as a person, and most importantly, no where do you even dare address that Congress has defined individuals as a "person" too. Your blathering outrage is nothing more than a deceitful defense of tyranny.

If you truly want corporate personhood ended, then the key is to have Congress repeal their statutory definitions of Congress being a "person", but this is quite clearly not at all what you want. Nope. Apparently want you want is the First Amendment repealed.

Why are you deflecting from the very real fact that Congress has defined corporations and individuals as a "person" in both the United States Code and Uniform Commercial Code. Why are fine with that? You cannot have it both ways. If you are truly upset over corporations being defined as a "person" then it follows you would be interested in ways to correct that problem rather than advocate smoke and mirrors tactics by a foolish old man of a Senator who is deceitfully and disingenuously attempting to repeal the First Amendment.

reply to post by Jason88

I agree our politicians are stupid, and maybe Senator Sanders is too. But, the point of this thread is to draw attention to an actual politician proposing a radical change that many Americans support :Get the corporations out of government.

Creating an Amendment that will have the effect of expanding Congressional power and allowing them to end run legislate around the First Amendment is not at all the answer, I assure you. Besides, this Amendment, if even passed, would never stand Constitutional muster and would be struck down as unconstitutional.

The Supreme Court is fully aware that Congress has defined corporations as a "person" and would be keen to understand that this proposed Amendment is not what it purports to be and has some other agenda behind it, which has nothing at all to do with keeping corporations out of government.

If the senator's target is off, aiming at the Supreme Court with Citizens United vs. FEC, then I say so what. It's the sentiment he is expressing that rings true, the power of his proposed amendment change that will allow ordinary Americans to believe in their government once again.

So what? So what if a Senator who took an oath of office to uphold the law and defend the Constitution for the United States of America is ignorant of the law and has no regard for the Constitution? So what?

And that's just it, while you are extremely well informed (I always enjoy your posts), most people are not.

Do you not understand that my efforts in this thread, and in this site are tirelessly dedicated to informing people? It is no excuse that people are not well informed, and there is nothing at all reasonable about an argument that seems to want to claim that ill informed people know what's best for freedom.

Informed or not, advocating Amendments that will do nothing to accomplish what they claim to accomplish but instead will create even more confusion regarding legislation and law is patently absurd.

This is a simple message, with an easy to sign petition, that empowers people to make a difference

How many times to I have to say that the People hold the inherent political power, and how loudly must I say it before People understand this? Petitions do not empower people. People have the power, but ill informed people cannot tap into that power and effectively use it. Why are you arguing for the People to remain ill informed and more gross expansion of government? What is that about? I feel I know you well enough to know this is not what you want to do. Consider what you are arguing my friend.

The issues you bring to the table sound very legitimate, but somewhat complex for the average American worker bee to understand.

Dear Lord, Jason! Worker bees are also called drones. The American People are much more than drones, or at the very least, have the great potential to be so much more. This is my passion, to urge People to be more, to accept their full power and responsibility and be more! I just cannot believe you are arguing for the opposite. If so, why?

I think the senator is doing the right thing and framing it in a way that all people can participate-in and understand.

Do you honestly believe that the American People are so stupid that if Sanders were to introduce a bill to repeal the USC and UCC's definitions of corporate personhood, they wouldn't understand the goodness and correctness in this? Do you honestly believe that a proposed Amendment can stand right beside actual legislation of corporations defined as a "person"? Do you think that the only way Congress can repeal legislation they enacted is by creating an Amendment? Come on Jason, I know you are much more thoughtful than that.

You think his target should be congress, but this standalone amendment he wants changed is a lot easier to fix than taking on congress.

You are mistaken. An Amendment is infinitely harder to get passed than simply just repealing the definitions.

And as we all know, no one has attention spans any more, so let's stick with something simple at first and see if makes a difference. My two cents.

Stop selling the American People so short, brother. Let's not agree to be stupid and let's instead agree to accept our responsibility has the inherent holders of the political power in this country and let's get back to the rule of law.

reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux


Havn't you realized? The First Amendment, along with the entirety of the Constitution is being debased to begin with, thanks to the "free speech" of special interest with NO restraints. You call it repealing the First Amendment & "a new brand of tyranny", I call it a step towards dissipating corruption in the political process.

I mistook your previous post for a defense of the Congress and the rights of corporate persons to manipulate monetary, fiscal, and social policies. So I apologize if I came out too aggressive. But I ask that you don't misconstrue my points either. Nobody is disputing the validity of natural persons as "persons". However, in a corporate structure, crimes and corruption are committed & nobody takes responsibility. If anything, this erratic domination by a minority needs to be addressed.

reply to post by Raelsatu

Nobody is disputing the validity of natural persons as "persons". However, in a corporate structure, crimes and corruption are committed & nobody takes responsibility. If anything, this erratic domination by a minority needs to be addressed.

You are missing the point about natural persons being statutorily defined as "persons". Natural persons do not need any statutory definition in order to enjoy personhood, so why in God's name has Congress defined them as so? Do you not get this? Are you one of the ill informed people Jason is speaking about?

By defining individuals as a "person" Congress has granted themselves legislative regulatory power over individuals. This is outrageous and is a very serious problem. It is not at all good news that individuals have been statutorily defined as a "person".

In terms of fighting the tyranny of the minority, the majority would be ill advised to use as a strategy charging off a cliff en masse like a bunch of lemmings. This will not stop tyranny, only empower it.

Bernie Sanders is the champion of the middle class and the poor.

He's the only Senator I know of that takes live questions from regular people each week on the radio. He goes door to door and talks to his constituents....gasp...he actually GIVES A DAMN about others and not his own pockets.

He's everything a politician should be.

And i guarantee, if he were to ever win the Democratic Party's nomination, he would win in an absolute landslide. He will not run in 2012 however....despite many wanting him to do so.

He's the polar opposite of Ron Paul in many degrees, although they do often agree on some issues.

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
reply to post by Raelsatu

 

You are missing the point about natural persons being statutorily defined as "persons". Natural persons do not need any statutory definition in order to enjoy personhood, so why in God's name has Congress defined them as so? Do you not get this? Are you one of the ill informed people Jason is speaking about?

Calm down, I understand. I didn't realize Congress had statutorily defined individuals. Since the politicians have essentially become an extension of corporations, the corporations make the laws. They've defined themselves as legal persons, with similar (more) rights than natural persons, but are not subject to prosecution for their crimes ironically.

In any case, what's your solution? Other than sarcastic mocking of the lemming masses? Let the special interest dominate everyone? I'm pretty sure their tyranny is exponentially worse than your supposition that it's repealing free speech to say get the money out of politics.

reply to post by David9176

He's everything a politician should be.

Which is apparently being ignorant of Congressional legislation. That's right, a Senator who does not know that USC and the UCC both define corporations as a person is everything a politician should be. Sigh.

I would also like to point out, there wouldn't have been a Federal Reserve Audit if it weren't for Bernie Sanders. Yes, it wasn't as strong as intended obviously, but the votes in the Senate were not there to do a full audit. Sanders was able to get enough to go along with his companion bill to Ron Paul's to get an audit done...showing the extent of the bank bailout...

Also, I am certainly glad to see someone post a thread based on a Bernie Sanders video...i've done it in the past...one of the few however.

Bravo OP.....S/F!!!!!!