Shad
Veteran Member
Gabbard is playing the long game while everyone else is playing a short game limited to the nomination. She is going for moderates not a fringe of progressives.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Tulsi Gabbard
- Thread starter Prometheus85
- Start date
Gabbard is playing the long game while everyone else is playing a short game limited to the nomination. She is going for moderates not a fringe of progressives.
I mostly agree with what you say except for this. I don't think politicians should be rich just from being a politician, and lobbying by corporations should be banned. Only community groups should be allowed to lobby the government, really.
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber
That doesn't mean they are DINO/RINO, it just means crap changes.
Some corporations...
Democratic National Committee
Republican National Committee
NAACP
Ban those & others from lobbying?
Sounds like a major 1st Amendment problem
Corporations aren't people. At the very least, Citizens United needs overturning and we need to find a way to shut down the politicians-to-lobbyists pipeline. AOC and Ted Cruz will be working together to sponsor a bill to do just that.
Corporations are formed by people, owned by people, & comprise
people (& assets). If people come together to achieve some purpose,
including things political, I see no valid reason to prevent this.
Would you require the DNC & NAACP to disband, & become some
other form of organization if they want to continue in politics?
Truly Enlightened
Well-Known Member
I totally agree with you. Corporate and Lobbyist money have no place in politics. You are taking my statement out of context. The context was IF all our social issues were addressed and delivered on, I wouldn't care what politicians do(as long as it was legal). Politicians work for the people. IF there were no homeless people, IF there was a comprehensive healthcare plan for all people, IF there was a job for everyone that wanted one, IF there was affordable housing for everyone, IF there was enough resources to address our infrastructure, clean air, clean water, and climate change, and IF we were not involved in endless regime change war, only then would I not care.
But these things are not happening because of the money in politics, that can buy the votes of our politicians and their legislation. Legislations that would only support the corporate's own self- interests, and provide our politicians with a steady paycheck. So I totally agree with Tulsi's bills to keep the money from lobbyists and Pac groups out of politics, and also in addressing the revolving door for high-ranking government officials.
I apologize for my poor wording, but I am absolutely not promoting corporate Lobbyists, and other special interest groups, to pay our politicians to serve only their interests. Period. Remember, ALL people have a right to speak to our government officials. We are only talking about when they use MONEY to do the talking for them.
Truly Enlightened
Well-Known Member
Corporations may be formed by people, and composed of people, but a corporation is not a people. It is a company or group of companies that act as a single people But, only people are people. No single person can acts as a single people. A corporation is an entity of shareholders, stockholders, and individuals, whose only purpose for operation, is to maximize its own profits. A person is NOT this.
Although the NAACP is a civil rights organization, and the DNC is a political organization, neither have the prime purpose of maximizing profits. This is a very poor analogy for justifying paying politicians to serve the corporate interests in maximizing their profits, and the voicing of specific concerns that are impacting various groups within our society(no money or favors involved). It is the money from people that that make the corporation. NO MATTER HOW MUCH MONEY CORPORATIONS HAVE FROM THE PEOPLE, THAT MONEY SHOULD NEVER USE TO USURP THE CONSTITUTIONAL POWER OF THE PEOPLE, FOR THEIR OWN INTEREST.
The reason for stopping this way of doing business is obvious. It will give those with the most money and power, an unfair advantage in the drafting of legislation. A seat at the table, if you will. This would lead our country down the road to becoming a Plutocracy(rule by the rich), or an Oligarchy(ruled by the few). I don't think that is what our founding fathers had envisioned for our country. Do you?
Everyone knows this except for the media who misrepresent the USSC
decision as corporations equalling people. Consider that the justices
know that corporations cannot vote, give birth, or do other things which
individuals do. But they are for other legal purposes, effectively people,
eg, engage in speech, sue in court.
They are nonetheless corporations, which the other
poster claimed should not be able to lobby government.
I'm not making an analogy.
That is a legitimate interest, for which lobbying is useful.
Anti-capitalist types don't like it, but making money is the
engine which fuels the economy & government.
The founders had businesses, so I'd expect that they
envisioned owners having political influence. Government
shouldn't be run solely by those with no business ties.
Shad
Veteran Member
Yes which would mean the party changed from X to Y thus the term can be used.
Shad
Veteran Member
CU includes Unions.
Truly Enlightened
Well-Known Member
Your analogy was that since corporations are made up of people, therefore, corporations ARE people. You are making an analogy of two things that seem the same(entity and people), and concluding that they ARE the same thing. That is a false analogy by false equivalence. They are not the same at all. Corporation, for legal reasons are a single entity, not a single person. The false equivalence is highlighted. The purpose of corporations, is NOT speech, it is to make money, period. In a capitalist society, that is its only purpose. Corporations don't give two hoots about public welfare, climate change, the cost of living, our healthcare, the homeless problem, regime change wars, Government spending, the value of a soldiers life, or any other social or foreign affairs issue. This entity only cares about raising its own profit margin. I don't have a problem with that because that is what corporations are suppose to do. But don't equate that to people, because that is a logical fallacy.
If you are saying that a civil rights organization, and a political organization, are both corporations, then I disagree with you. Especially if your argument is, that they both engage in speech, and file law suits. You wouldn't be suing Richard Mc Donald, you would be just suing McDonalds. This is also a fallacious argument. But if you can't see this, then it is too late to explain why.
No one has said that corporate lobbyists should not lobby their representatives. No one has said people with business experience should not seek public office. These are just the straw man you've created, and obviously ignoring my last paragraph. Since you haven't , IT IS THE MONEY WE WANT TO KEEP OUT OF POLITICS, NOT THE CONCERNS OF THE PEOPLE. Unless you feel that all government legislation should be bought and paid for by the highest bidder? Or, that all our elected representatives should be paid by two bosses? Or, maybe you think that corporate lobbyists and special interest groups, simple use harsh language to convince their representatives to pass or veto certain legislation?
Who do you think provides the profits for these corporations? Do they grow money in their corporate backyards? They are funded by the people. What do you think would happen if the McDonald's Corporation lost 70% of its customers, to the Burger King Corporation? Bye Bye MacD. It is the people that have the power not the corporations. So you are now suggesting that the people give up their power, to the corporations? To give corporations the power to PAY for whatever legislation they want? And, you can't see the potential abuse this would lead to? Amazing. Fortunately Tulsi does. She is here for us, even in spite of ourselves.
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber
That would mean then that all Dems are DINOs as they were the party of Jim Crowe and segregation. All Reps would also be RINOs as Reps gave us national parks, the EPA, and OSHA.
Read my last post, understand it, & then you'll be truly enlightened.
Til then we lack common ground.
Truly Enlightened
Well-Known Member
I do not judge you by your Icon, so please do not judge me by mine. If you think that I have misrepresented, or misunderstood your comments, then please, I'm all ears. I am not shy about apologizing or admitting to anything that I might have misunderstood or misrepresented. I am curious about your views on plutocracy and oligarchy. If not, it has been my pleasure.
Ted Cruz? That's both surprising and cool.
I was just having a little fun with yer moniker.
We should mix fun with serious discussion,
lest it get too serious.
No, I think I understand your posts.
Our difference is that I believe that all should have the right to lobby
government, eg, the poor, the rich, business, non-profits. And the
form of organization, be it incorporated or not, is irrelevant.
That was what you responded to when I addressed another's post.
Truly Enlightened
Well-Known Member
Well, it looks like the DNC will finally get rid of Tulsi. She won't be on the Sept debate stage. Although she has over 160,000 unique donors, and 2-3% in 8 qualifying polls, they will simply choose only the polls where she is polling with less than 2%. This is how Corporate America protects itself from anyone that is a real threat to the status quo. Corporate America is allowing us to choose between two cognitively-challenged old men, to placate our fears, and to continue doing business as usual. We have only ourselves to blame. They will just keep getting richer, and we will still be fighting over the crumbs that they leave us. It looks like we ARE indeed ruled by the rich and powerful. Both in mind, and in spirit. God help us all, because real democracy is dead.
Corporate Americastan, eh.
It's the Democrats who give her the low poll numbers, not corporations
(which aren't represented in the polls). People need to take responsibility
for their own choices. Ask yourself...why do so few Democrats support her?
Why prefer Biden & a hawk like Pocahontas?
Truly Enlightened
Well-Known Member
No problem, and I agree with you. Everyone, including Corporations, associations, groups, and individuals, all should be allowed to lobby the government. But there must be a level playing field for all to participate. The only way this can be accomplished, is if money is taken out of politics. Politicians are human, and have human weaknesses. Their first responsibility should be in service to all the people. Not just corporations or special interest groups, but all the people. Decisions should be based on the merits of the issues alone. Large money donors have an obvious advantage. This is not Democracy. This is a Plutocracy. If this is what my America has become, I will gladly take Trumps advice.