I think your right; there is too much money being thrown
into our elections. Too many sound bite videos get created and rebroadcast or put on social media that feeds the parrots, and usually misrepresents or distorts facts and positions. Not good; not healthy.
1 Like
So in your opinion the current USSC decision against private employer vaccine mandates is completely compatible with the 1916 decision.
If there is a law on the books it sounds likes it’s okay, as opposed to it being an EO. Is that a salient distinction here ?
No, but I noticed the folks who spend big tend come out pretty well up on the hill. There’s a reason folks spend the way they do. And it’s not because of a love of freedom, or democracy. It’s because they’ve bought and paid for the influence to write the laws.
The biggest players pay both sides, that way they always come out on top.
But you are right they don’t buy elections like I originally said. They just buy every other square on the Monopoly board so if you’re playing you’re going to lose.
2 Likes
Let’s face it. A lot of people vote with their emotion rather than logic and some people know (won’t say who) how to exploit that.
I don’t think that’s ok. That’s the problem I have with CU.
Preciso 
It’s a difference between state and federal power.
As I said, a STATE or LOCAL mandate, like the one in Jacobson, might very well be upheld.
A FEDERAL (emphasis added) mandate is a different story. Obviously it stood for healthcare employers, because they pretty much all receive FEDERAL (emphasis added) funding.
But for a private employer not receiving such funding, debatable.
Probably need a Jacobson style state or local mandate.
The problem I see with that is it would be nearly impossible for 50 states to put in place
such laws or mandates ( governor EO ?) during a pandemic. The next pandemic
may not have a mere 1.7 % mortality ; it could be 17%, or possibly 20% mortality for children under 12. Balance between personal liberty vs public good is tricky.
I’m not an elected government official that posted about the constitution, did I? That’s the difference.
Time for a New Constitutional Convention. Current Constitution is an anachronism drafted for a 18th century world trying to deal with 21century problems.
I must point out that “unions” do not give any money to political campaigns.
What makes you think Ross Perot tried to buy an election? Because he put up a ton of his own money? He got nearly 19%. Millions responded to him because he made perfect sense on the economical and foreign policy level. Ross Perot was the Donald Trump of the 90’s except that he did not have a media platform to at least showcase what he had to say. Without Ross Perot clinton would have never been elected. When has the republican party ever been united since President Ronald Reagan? It is a trick question since the republican party did not even want Mr. Reagan as a front runner. They imposed Bush Senior as his V.P. because Bush senior represented the d.c. swamp. Does that sound familiar with pence? You bet it does. Bush senior made a huge tactical error listening to the d.c. swamp telling him to dismiss Perot. He had plenty of times to get Perot on his side but he choose not to. You could say it was personal. Ross Perot was first and foremost an American loving his country. If Bush would have made concessions to reflect Perot’s ideology Perot would have step aside. That cost him his reelection. On the opposite side the democratic has always been united. President " Donald Trump a one termer" How do you know what the future holds?
The Constituiton evolves in the form of amendments to it and not the political whim of a judge. Judges are to interpret the law. Legislative bodies create the law. I’m a firm believer in separation of powers.
Not sure if that’s true or not, but even if it is, it’s beside the point. The whole point is…they can and should be able to if they want to, and the government shouldn’t interfere with that.
That’s the beauty of Citizens United. Now ANY organization of any political flavor can FREELY give to the causes and candidates that they wish, without STATE INTERFERENCE.
I call that…LIBERTY!!!
Give me Liberty or give me death!!!
I call that, rainbows and unicorns freedom ideas. That just has no relation to the real world and how it actually operates.
No different that the college student wearing a Che’ shirt saying no one had tried “real communism” yet. Maybe true but an intellectual excercise not a real world positive.
I should have been more specific.
Union dues are not given to candidates. Organizations of volunteers and voluntary money associated with unions give plenty to candidates.
What makes me think that Perot tried to buy the election?
How about his ACTIONS??? He tried to buy up all sorts of prime-time advertising space for self-promoting infomercials, etc. He did all he could to use his money to win it all.
But as I stated…HE FAILED!!!
Communism fell under GHWB. He deserved votes over Perot on that basis, if not on any other. And Perot’s running gave us that embarrassment Clinton who was later successfully sued for sexual harassment, accused of sexual assault, and lied under oath while in office. THANKS PEROT!!!
Hell, as I mentioned, Hillary’s campaign outspent Trump by a WIDE margin.
Guess what? She still LOST!!!
And that’s my point. Clinton’s campaign proves you can’t buy an election in America.
And that’s why complaints/fears from the Left about Citizens United are so dumb.
I figured the Left would be DELIGHTED that Unions and Planned Parenthood can now give to the candidates of their choice in whatever amount they want without government interference.
Why they wouldn’t be DELIGHTED about that prospect remains one of the world’s greatest unsolved mysteries.
I 100% agree with you that you can’t buy an election but…more later.
You think Ross Perot run for President for infomercials? The guy was already a multi Billionaire. He was not happy with the d.c. swamp. He let it known to Bush Senior for years. Bush Senior had a choice. Either listen to him or taking the risk that he would run. Bush Senior choose the d.c. swamp over Perot common sense approach. This is a great example of why the d.c. swamp is never to be trusted. You can also point out on how the mainstream media ran with false polls for months. These intentional false polls greatly contributed to Bush Senior loss. President Trump win in 2016 is the culmination of President Reagan’s success and Ross Perot’s run.
Voting for Perot would have also meant voting for the anti-free trade guy and the guy who was militantly pro-legalized abortion, two concepts that are anathema to true conservatives like yours truly.
So part of the DC swamp or not, he was undesirable as a POTUS in my books.
HARD PASS!!!
Facts:
The anti free trade the way it evolved was catastrophic for American company based in America,. Thousands of American manufacturing companies had to move their manufacturing outside of America. There is a huge difference between free trade and dumping. I worked in this industry for about five years. Chinese manufacturers love to get your business. You sign a contract then after about a year or two you start seeing manufacturing issues. You are “stuck” with your supplier and have no choice. A few months later your own patented product is knocked off. Do you think the ccp is going to help the American owned company? They never have and never will. The fact that it took President Trump arrival to look at free trade agreements speaks volume on how d.c. has been corrupted. The ccp was not happy to have to accept President Trump demands. Being an amazing businessman they had to bow to him. No one on the republican or democrat side thought that it was possible. He did. Remember 44 saying on that same subject:
“He has to do with automation” why do companies go to automation? or asking another way “Does the minimum wage have anything to do with automation?” Of course it does. Do you think china has a minimum wage? Forced labor is more like it. Remember the “magic wand” from the same 44? He goes on speaking about jobs for clean energy.
How can someone that was elected president can be so disconnected from its own society? This is not even a case of one party vs another but it is 100% the case on how d.c. has been corrupted to the core and aid China to take away our own manufacturing.
You mentioned the right to choose or abortion. What about the following?
1970: Introduced Family Planning Services Act
George’s main interest in Congress was population control. He supported Planned Parenthood, and he advocated family planning as a way to protect a woman’s health & to combat poverty. In those days, family-planning advocates spoke openly of contraception, and legal abortion was the goal of many, including Bush.
“He was most definitely pro-choice–then,” said former Rep. James Scheuer (D-NY). “He was very supportive until he became Reagan’s VP. Then he had to adopt Reagan’s backward position. After that, when George would see me in the House, he’d say, ‘Jim, don’t break my cover.’ And I never did–until now. George couldn’t have continued supporting family planning and still made the national ticket.”
George joined Scheuer to introduce the Family Planning Services and Population Research Act, which became law in 1970 and the only federal program solely dedicated to family planning. In 1988, under Reagan, clinics were prohibited from providing abortion counseling, which George had once supported.
Even Trump had to reverse himself on NAFTA, and negotiated a new treaty on that when he had openly campaigned against it, so even Trump ultimately realized that being anti-free trade and anti-NAFTA, as Perot was, is a non-starter.
Ronald Reagan was the first to propose such a treaty.
Given that, it’s totally anathema to the concept of Reagan conservatism to be opposed to free trade.
1 Like