The Easy Case Against Shareholders Being Corporations and Deserving Corporate Personhood Part 3

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.

the-easy-case-against-corporate-personhood-part-2-and-the-case-for-money-out-of-politics–JohnHively.wordpress.com

Advertisements

Read Full Post »

The Easy Case Against Corporate Personhood Part 2, and the Case For Money Out of Politics

Dictionary.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 »

Video: Sen. Elizabeth Warren calls for end to corporate tax inversions

“Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) called for an end to a tax loophole that lets corporations that renounce U.S. citizenship to dodge taxes. “’These companies are renouncing their American citizenship, turning their backs on this country, simply to boost their profits,’” she said.

Corporations are citizens? The Corporate US Supreme Court has ruled that Exxon, Monsanto and Walmart Corporations and all the other US corporations are persons with all of the individual rights granted to “persons” under the US Constitution, but I did not know they were citizens, and I did not know Goldman Sachs Incorporated could renounce that screwed up concept of US citizenship in order to avoid taxes, but that’s how corrupt the US government has become since and because of the Reagan tax cuts. Corrupt to the core on behalf of the 1 percent.

Read Full Post »

We Can End Corporate Personhood Rights

The corrupt corporate wing of the United States Supreme Court has ruled that a publicly traded, limited liability corporation is a person with all of the Constitutional rights of any human citizen, and more. The corporate or Koch Brothers wing of the supreme court is corrupted by big money, or it’s ideologically corrupt, or both. Okay, we know a corporation is a business, not a person, but exactly what are corporations?

A corporation can be defined as a group of investors (shareholders), but the Constitution gives only individual rights. It does not provide group rights. So the court couldn’t reasonably provide legal standing for personhood via this route.

A corporation, however, is really organized money. Investors combine their money, and organize it into a business via state charters. The Constitution does not give “organized money” legal rights.

State charters, however, refer to corporations as “artificial persons.” It’s on this basis that the court has ruled that corporations are persons. This, of course, is bogus, and the members of the court know this.

If we call dogs “imitation persons,” and a town or state provide legal recognition for this to occur, does this mean that dogs are persons with all the constitutional rights as actual citizens? Yes, it does, but only if the dogs possess enough money to influence the courts to make it so, like organized money.

If the court felt obliged to give dogs person-hood rights under this situation, that means you’d have to sit in a restaurant and watch the diner next to you eat their food while occasionally slurping their butt and scratching their fleas. To protect the civil rights of dogs, I mean these four footed persons, humans would need to be allowed to slurp their own butts in restaurants. Otherwise, anybody could sue any restaurant under the equal protection clause of the Constitution’s fourteenth amendment for the right to slurp their rear ends in public.

Fortunately, dogs don’t have sufficient cash to buy off the Supreme Court. So naturally, the court will never give dogs person-hood rights, even if another government body enacts a law calling dogs “imitation persons.” That’s why the concept that a government chartered “artificial person” is a real person is totally bogus. Every member of the Supreme Court knows this.

Click here for more on the story

Read Full Post »

Occupy the Corrupt Corporate Courts

Inspired by our friends at Occupy Wall Street, and Dr. Cornel West, Move To Amend is planning bold action to mark the second anniversary of the infamous Citizens United v. FEC decision!

Occupy the Courts will be a one day occupation of Federal courthouses across the country, including the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington, D.C., on Friday January 20, 2012.

Move to Amend volunteers across the USA will lead the charge on the judiciary which created — and continues to expand — corporate personhood rights.

Americans across the country are on the march, and they are marching OUR way. They carry signs that say, “Corporations are NOT people! Money is NOT Speech!” And they are chanting those truths at the top of their lungs! The time has come to make these truths evident to the courts.

➤➤ Join us Friday, January 20, 2012 at a Federal Court building near you!

Read Full Post »