i didnt say we live in a free society. we quite clearly dont. we have horrifying campaign finance BS to deal with.
man, i gotta disagree with you martin, even though i can understand your points. so now is the time when you can start calling me stupid, and whatever, but honestly, i can't see how you can defend the corporations and unions in this matter. all it does is ensure the people with money are heard, and everyone else is ****ed. You can say go out and vote but none of these politicians live up to the bill of goods they try to sell in the campaigns anyway. I actually love the idea of having a 16 week campaign, and i also think that only humans should be able to donate. Not an LLC, or INC. So fire away your insults my friend.
This is a bunch of crap. The masses vote for these morons and they know they suck. They are just too lazy to look at the other candidates.
again, people deserve the right to give money to whomever they want. corporations and unions are groups of poeple with common interests. if you cant stomach freedom, then that is your problem, you shouldnt try to stop anyone else from giving money to whoever. the main problem with poltics is that people like you dont really want freedom, they hate it and are scared of it. they want more and more rules. 16 week campaigns? who are you to tell a candidate when he can start campaigning? why must you want control of everything? only humans donate? what about humans that group together and run businesses? corporations are not balls of pure evil, they are groups of people. yu should accept that other people have interests that are not the same as yours without trying to regulate them. you cant really regulate them anyways. pass your 19 week rule and campaigning happens anyways we just call it something different. ban money, and i still give as much as i want, i just say it is not for a candidate, but for a group that favors a candidate.
again, if you and i started a pro-weed group, and we wanted to run a candidate and he wanted to start campaigning before your oppressive rules said he could, or donate more money than lasalle allowed, you dont love freedom. you are scared of it. rules are bad. you should always want to get by with as few of them as possible.
What good can come out of having a candidate that is a slave to his or her contributors? How does that benefit the country?
the good is that we are free to donate to candidates that represent us. you are free and i am free. what we gain is freedom. if you want to express your point of view, give to candidate you like. perhaps he or she will run a billboard expressing your opinion, or maybe win the election and represent your interests. thats you expressing your freedom, you donate to who you want. again, try to prevent it and you just make it more insidious. try and stop my corporation from donating to candidate x, go ahead. they will just run ads that totally lie and BS the other candidate, while not being officially on the behalf of the candidate. even if this waqs a problem, you cant solve it. you can only make it worse. your solutions are wors than the problem. the fact is, an any political system, people with money and a voice will have money and a voice. get used to it. ignore their voices if you want. dont regulate. understand that regulation is counterproductive, most of the time.
that isn't necessarily true though. I would have to donate hundreds of thousands of dollars to have any influence. Thus.... the only influence in politics, is the influence of the rich. The middle class, and the poor don't have a voice when it comes to politics. What this is accomplishing is that the very few Americans who make the most money benefit, while the majority of the country are left in the streets.
