Jeff Binkley -> Ed Hulett wrote:



 ~>>>>> This recent Supreme Court ruling is literally the very
 ~>>>>> definition of fascism as defined by Benito Mussolini.

 EC>>>>> Sauer doesn't understand what fascism is.  Why don't you help
 EH>> him  SH>> out? EC> What is the definition of fascism? 
Mussolini's
 SH>>>> definition. The literal EC> definition.  The
"very" definition.

 EC>>>>> Now, could you next explain why the Court ruling is
the "very"
 SH>>>> definition?

 EC>>>>> This could be amusing.

 SH>>>> I'm making some popcorn.

 RS>>> Contrary to Wayne's raving, this SC ruling is not fascist.

 RS>>> In fact the only SC ruling I can think of that *WAS* fascist in
 RS>>> nature was the Dred Scott ruling, which pretty much stated, "The
 RS>>> US is whites only, n****** don't count."

 EH>> Why do you insist on showing the world you have no earthly clue what
 EH>> fascism is?

 RS>>> Now, as to this ruling, just something to remember here:

 RS>>> This ruling lets unions and even Hugo Chavez dump as much money
 RS>>> as they want to to any candidate they want to.

 RS>>> Just something to think about...

 EH>> You are an absolute idiot. What this ruling does is remove the
 EH>> Democrats' advantage in campaign fund raising. It will have no effect
 EH>> on how much unions contribute to campaigns. Hugo Chavez will not be
 EH>> able to contribute anything.

 EH>> The interesting thing is how Obama pledged to give a "forceful
 EH>> response" to this ruling and claiming how this allows special
 EH>> interests to "drown out the voices of the people." In
light of his
 EH>> choosing to be the first major candidate to forgo matching public
 EH>> funds last year and the majority of his contributors being lawyers
 EH>> and law firms and other special interests, it's a bit of hubris on
 EH>> his part to condemn this SC ruling.

 JB> I am fine with folks contributing to political campaigns, what I want to
 JB> see is full disclosure.  What we have now are folks funneling money
 JB> through shadow organizations, people lying on donation forms and many
 JB> more similar activities.  That is what needs to get cleaned up.

Exactly and each political ad should carry a full text and/or audio
disclaimer that is understandable. No more of this 4 point text on the
bottom of the ad that is unreadable without magnification. No more of the
quickly mumbled disclaimer a second before the ad ends.

Ed

-- 
"Truth does not become more true by virtue of the fact that the
entire world agrees with it, nor less so even if the whole world
disagrees with it." --Jewish philosopher Maimonides (1135-1204)

Blogs: http://edsramblings.wordpress.com | http://woodcaringnsuch.wordpress.com
http://edsscrollsawbits.blogspot.com

Facebook: http://wwwfacebook.com/ed.hulett | Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/yaesu

Linux User #416016
Linux Machine #385030

--- Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (X11/20090817)