When Will the New House Republicans Start Working on Creating Jobs?

Wrong as usual/always. I'm asking you a direct question, expecting nothing in return.

Come on. Disappoint me.

 

Clearly the answer to my question is 'yes'. The only example you've offered to creating jobs is raising an army, and the only purpose you've offered for raising an army is to create jobs.

 

I am all for Government having a roll in creating jobs. You only asked me if supported government in creating military jobs. That's not what I said.

It is attention to detail that distinguishes a good debater.

 

And I spose you consider yourself a master debater, eh?

You first brought up the military.

Details, details.

 

Yes and a cunning linguist.

 

The people who own corporations have rights, including the right to assemble and express their opinions.

 

I can't believe I missed the phrasing when I read it before. Buck, are you really saying that corporations aren't property??

 

And as owners of these corporations it doesn't entitle them the opportunity to have "more" rights, and to manipulate the election process to benefit a minority.
Every individual who can legally vote should be able to donate a small acceptable contribution, to any elected official they can cast a legal vote for.
　

NOBODY else, including business/corporate entities, special interest/union organizations, Church's/religious cults, and absolutely "NO" foreign citizens or countries should be sending any campaign contributions for an election they cannot participate in. Out side influences (money and power) is what has brought us to the level of government corruption we are at today. We need to get the money out of politics.
　
Our form of democracy has been compromised and it is easily tampered with and manipulated because of the money accumulated by a two party system, not the will of the people.
　
　
The depths our government has gone too, by giving corporations rights, clearly shows a disconnect with our government and what is best for the nation as a whole.

The fact they would condone/allow even more corruption into the system is mind boggling. This is nothing more than corruption for corruption sake should be speaking volumes this two party system that dictates the interests of the party over the people. Rather than stopping the union special interest funding of the government they allowed the barrage of outside interference in “all” elections, and have contributed to the further manipulation of the election process.

 

Exactly. Why should I be entitled to two voices? One for me and one for my corporation?

 

I'm gonna say Never.

 

I'm gonna say good cause it's not their job.

 

They have no more or no less right than any one or any other group.

What is a foreign citizen? Churches of course come under the special church/state relationship we have but other than that citizens are free to assemble as they please and engage in their political speech without government oppression or interference. You don't get to stifle it because you don't like it.
　

We are a republic, a federal republic.


　

What "corporate right" do you object to?

If you want to go after corrupt political practices go after the public sector unions and liberal groups trying to influence elections with phony registrations and balloting.

 

So you are against free assembly of the citizenry to voice their grievances and advance their policies?

Why should you be entitled to a voice for you and one for say the NEA if you are a teacher?

 

I am against giving civil rights to entities that are not human beings.
Why are you for it?

 

My opinion:

No

I shouldn't. The NEA is a corporation, thus property, just like a business. While the members can pay for ad time through the NEA, they/we should not be allowed to contribute money once as a voter and again as an anonymous member of NEA. Once is enough for anybody.

 

Bluesguy;

　
They have no rights, only people have rights. As individuals the people who own them already have their rights, and one vote. See that’s how easy it really is. If you cannot legally cast a vote, in an upcoming election, for a legitimate candidate you have no business donating money to their election campaign. It should be criminal and considered tampering with an election, at least and bribery at most. So if you cannot vote you are either to young, not a legal resident, or an inanimate object that cannot donate to the cause anyway, since they are not people, have no rights, which means they “NO” money, and should mean they have no power/influence in politics, what-so-ever.
　
　

　
　
A foreign citizen is someone who isn’t a legal resident or is a citizen from another country.
　
Any Church that openly supports a potential candidate or political party should lose any and all tax exemptions immediately if not sooner (Churches should only be exempt when they are spending money to help the community and/or people in general). That doesn’t mean that they cannot discuss topics that pertain to them in their lives. The individuals have every right to discuss anything they want peacefully of course, and those same individuals have the right to donate to any political cause they are legally allowed to participate in. The Church is a building, an inanimate object that has no rights and no money to donate in support of a political candidate or party.
　
　

　
　
　
Democracy simply means a government by the people; a form of government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them or by their elected agents/representatives. Coincidentally a republic is pretty much the same thing only a republic requires those representatives and/or agents to have limited power and to abide by the written law, not dictate on a whim behind closed doors, or make (*)(*)(*)(*) up as they go along.
　
　

　
　
We’ll keep repeating it just for you. Inanimate objects are not people, have no rights, no money, and they should hold no power/influence in politics, what-so-ever!!

 

I believe in freedom of assembly.

 

So you don't believe in freedom of assembly, OK.

 

If they are smart - never.

Job creation is not for governments (outside of communist/VERY socialistic countries). It's for the private sector to do.

Now if the American government would just get out of the way and let the American economy do it's thing and let greed take it's course - America will be economically strong again fairly soon.

The more the government meddles and tries to control it - the worse it will get.

That's why the last two administrations PLUS the Fed have poured trillions into the economy and it is worse off (in many ways) then it was 4 years ago. And all the ways it is better (marginally better employment figures and a stock market bubble) are all artificially created by government cheap money and will end the minute this cheap money ends.

 

Sure I believe in freedom of assembly. I fail to see how anonymous people hiding behind their corporate logo sending enormous checks to politicians is freedom of assembly, though.

Perhaps you can help me out?

 

No you don't because a corporation is just an assembly of people and you want to deny them their right to speak as a group on an issue. Let's ban political parties then.

 

They certainly seemed to think so when Obama was first elected.

 

His job to get out of the way... which he is not doing.

 

President Obama is CEO of the largest organization in the world. He should be worried about running IT successfully and within budget rather than going around and preaching at private business and telling them what to do. Especially since had has never run anything in his life.

He should announce that tax rates will NOT go up in two years then get out of the way and stay in the White House and work on getting his own house in order. THAT is what he was elected to do.

Turn off soap box mode now..............

 

Why in the hell would he make a promise not to raise taxes? Have you SEEN the deficit? We need to solve this thing ASAP and we need to do it with both tax hikes and spending cuts. Not raising taxes in the next 2 years is not an option.