Posts Tagged ‘Citizen’s United’

After the Koch Brother’s wing of the US Supreme Court came under intense criticism for its incredibly corrupt decision in the Citizen’s United case, which granted business corporations constitutional rights, sometimes called personhood rights, the corporate media attempted to confuse the public, so as to dilute the public wrath toward the court’s five corrupt, corporate members, Chief Justice John Roberts (a well known perjurer), Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito (Another well known perjurer), Anthony Kennedy, and Antonin Scalia. See Precedents Begin to Fall for Roberts Court–New York Times.

Pundits on television and commentators in the written press defended the court’s decision by saying nonsensical things, such as shareholders of corporations are people and deserve constitutional rights. This type of argument was only intended to confuse people.

A business corporation is “an imaginary business model given the legal rules to exist and operate by legislative authorization under the legal fiction of being an “artificial person.” Shareholders are the owners of business corporations, which are only ideas.

To suggest shareholders of corporations are the same as the corporations they own is as illogically sound as to suggest that a person who owns a dog is in fact his dog, or the people who own a chicken poop farm are the chicken poop on their farm, or the people who own communal land jointly are the land they own, or the husband and wife who own a house together are the house, or the person who owns toilet paper is the toilet paper she owns.

Don’t let the pundits and commentators of the corporate propaganda machine lie to you.

Another point never made in rebuttal to the “shareholders are corporations” argument was that corporate shareholders already have constitutional rights as individuals. Besides, the US constitution does not grant group rights, it only grants individual rights, and shareholders already had those.

Even that point would have only served to divert our attention from the real issue, which is shareholders are not corporations anymore than the owner of kitty litter is kitty litter, although that nonsense seems to make sense to the folks at Fox News, as well as Chief anti-Justice John Roberts, as well as his fellow anti-justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Anthony Kennedy, and Antonin Scalia.

The economic, political and economic games are rigged in favor of the 1 percent by the 1 percent. The US Supreme Court’s Citizen’s United decision, and the public defense of that decision, and corporate personhood, were just other ways of further rigging the game to hide the the gigantic economic, political and judicial corruption that soaks the United States, its corporations, and its governments. The anti-justices of the US Supreme Court simply did their job, which is why they were nominated by US presidents and confirmed by the US senate, and so they created another conduit to help the 1 percent increase that corruption, and continue to redistribute income from the 99 to the 1 percent without the 99 percent ever seeing it.

That’s the mission of the corrupt, corporate wing of the US Supreme Court: Chief anti-Justice John Roberts, Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Anthony Kennedy, and Antonin Scalia.

Click the link below for more on this issue.



Read Full Post »

free speech moneyDictionary.com defines a person as:

1. a human being, whether an adult or child:

2. a human being as distinguished from an animal or a thing.

A thing can be anything other than a human being by this official definition. Ergo, flies, mosquitoes, cats, goats, bears, cars, airplanes, ideas, and publicly traded limited liability corporations are all things, which means that they are not persons, in any sense.

A business corporation was an idea of a business model somebody thought up 500 years ago. It wasn’t a human being, since it was a thought that sprang from somebody’s head. It still is only a thought.

Today, a more precise definition of a business corporation is “an imaginary business model given life and the legal rules to exist and operate by legislative authorization under the legal fiction of being an “artificial person.”

According to Dictionary.com the word legal means “permitted by law; lawful.” They define “fiction” as “something feigned, invented, or imagined; a made-up story.” Some of the synonyms for “feign” are fake, bluff, counterfeit, and devise.

Artificial is defined as made by human skill; produced by humans (opposed to natural ): as in artificial flowers. 2. imitation; simulated; sham:

Therefore, an artificial person is not real, and in the corporate sense, it’s not even an artificial person, like an artificial flower is something tangible, such as a plastic flower. Rather, it’s an idea from somebody’s imagination.

Most likely a corrupt politician long ago had an idea that the best way to give an idea called corporation constitutional rights was to label it an artificial person, although it was only an idea, and not an artificial anything.

In 1886, the US Supreme court is thought to have ruled that the idea called publicly traded limited liability corporations were persons, and to have equal rights under the law with organic persons, based on the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment. This decision, of course, was based on corruption within the court, rather than any legal perspective, because there was no other sense to it, especially from a legal point of view. But the decision still stands more than a century later.

In 2010, the US Supreme court expanded this idea and gave the ideas known as corporations personhood rights, which shows that the corruption of 1886 is still strong today.

It doesn’t take a giant of a mind to figure out that a corporation is an idea, and not a person, and so one can be reasonably certain that corruption, which permeates the US government, also soaks the corporate wing of the US Supreme Court to the marrow.

Besides, if I call a guitar cord, say A, an artificial person, does that make it a person, a human being? Obviously not, but the justices on the US Supreme Court have decided in that if you label an idea as an artificial person then it must be so.

You have to wonder how much cash these folks on the US Supreme Court are getting under the table. In which case, you can see why Chief Justice John Roberts swore under oath that he would respect legal precedence during his senate confirmation hearings, and then he voted to end 100 years of legal precedence when he voted yes in the Citizen’s United Case. This benefited only billionaires and their corporations.

It’s strange that Roberts, as well as fellow supreme court justices Samuel Alito, Anthony Kennedy, Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas are not able to read a dictionary and figure out that an idea is not a person, even if somebody had an idea to label another idea as an artificial person. Is it because they’re mentally incapable of seeing the obvious, or because they are corrupt? It is likely the latter since these persons are not stupid little boys.

And that is the case against money in politics. We can assume corruption is playing a role in the rulings of the US Supreme Court, as well as in the enactment of legislation.

The Case Against Corporate Personhood: Why Corporations Are Not People, And Yes, The Corrupt Corporate Wing of the US Supreme Court Knows This, But They Are Corrupt to the Core You Know–JohnHively.wordpress.com

Read Full Post »

Breaking News, the US Senate Votes to Repeal Citizens United

BREAKING from US Uncut: By a vote of 79-18, the Senate just voted to advance a constitutional amendment that would overturn Citizens United. The vote is an historic landmark which demonstrates the overwhelming public support for limiting corporate money in elections. SHARE if you demand money out of politics.

Read Full Post »

Read Full Post »

Not so shockingly, earlier this week, on the US Supreme Court, the disciples of the almighty dollar who religiously protect the profits and the rights of the 1 percent to shape the nation’s laws against the US Constitution and legal precedence, so as to better redistribute income from the 99 percent to themselves, have struck again. The corporate wing of the court struck down “a long-standing limit on how much donors can give to federal candidates, political parties and political action committees in a two-year election cycle. Without any aggregate limit, a donor can now give millions (even billions) directly to candidates and parties. The 5-to-4 decision in the McCutcheon v. FEC case is being described as the “next Citizens United,” referring to the 2010 ruling that opened the floodgates for unlimited corporate spending on U.S. elections.”

During his senate confirmation hearings, future US Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts declared that he would respect legal precedence. So, too, did Justice Samuel Alito, at his hearing. They both lied under oath. The only precedence they respect is that which makes corporations and the rich more politically powerful, and the precedence they don’t respect are the ones that make publicly traded limited liability corporations and the rich politically and economically weaker. In other words, Roberts and Alito are two of the five Supreme Court justices that are respectfully known as the corporate wing of the Supreme Court, and they lied under oath to get there.

The sleaze factor, related to the corruption factor, was on full display last week when Roberts and Alito voted to once again put their lies during their confirmation hearings on full display. Check out the links below.

The New York Times–Precedents Begin to Fall for Roberts Court

Democracy Now! Senator Bernie Sanders–Supreme court undermines democracy by allowing billionaires to buy elections

Read Full Post »

Read Full Post »

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »