Last Wednesday, the grassroots organization, Move to Amend, held a press conference at the National Press Club to announce that six members of the U.S. House of Representatives were introducing legislation to overturn Citizens United v FEC to make free speech and all other rights guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution available only to “natural persons,” not corporations or limited liability companies. The legislation would also give Federal, state and local governments the ability to limit political contributions to “ensure all citizens, regardless of their economic status, have access to the political process.”
When corporations overturn the will of the people, it’s widely covered by corporate media. When the people fight back, the news is frequently blacked out. As of this morning, we could find no major corporate media outlet or corporate wire service reporting on last Wednesday’s press conference by Move to Amend. That might be because there was evidence presented at the press conference of a groundswell of public momentum to overturn Citizens United, the decision handed down on January 21, 2010 by the U.S. Supreme Court that opened the floodgates to corporate campaign spending in elections along with super wealthy donors.
The press conference revealed that 16 states have passed resolutions asking Congress to overturn Citizens United while almost 600 municipalities and local governments across the country have done likewise. Almost two dozen other states have resolutions pending or introduced.
Continue . . . http://wallstreetonparade.com/2015/05/corporate-media-blacks-out-coverage-of-bill-to-overturn-corporate-personhood/
Corporate Media Blacks Out Coverage of Bill to Overturn Corporate Personhood
Discussion in 'News & Current Events' started by poncho, May 13, 2015.
-
righteousdude2 Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
You work hard to keep people divided and they work hard to keep people un-informed. It wouldn't be to "far fetched" for one to conclude that you have a "symbiotic" relationship with the corporate media based on the reading of your threads. :flower: -
Revmitchell Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
Corporations are people. Those people should have just as much access to the political system as anyone else. If our politicians are listening to them more than others because of money then we need to vote for those who do not. The answer is not limiting freedom it is holding our politicians accountable at the ballot box.
-
In any case politicians don't care what you think, you aren't the one filling their campaign chests with millions of dollars. Why should they listen to you? The corporations have the power to mold public opinion through the ownership and control of the mass media so why should they worry about what someone like you who hasn't got a billion dollar bank account, no lobbyists in Washington or a huge media empire thinks? -
Revmitchell Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
Your insistence that they are corporate backed does not make it so.Click to expand...
Corporations can have no influence without politicians who accept their moneyClick to expand...
That's not true at all Rev. Corporations have the power to manipulate public opinion through their ownership of the mass media and control of information.
Maybe just maybe the politicians who accept their money actually agree with what the corps want.Click to expand...
Demonizing business is not the answer.Click to expand...
Hold politicians accountable.Click to expand...
If the law was applied equally that is. But that wouldn't bode well for "your team" now would it Rev? -
Revmitchell Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
You really need to learn what a red herring is.
-
Revmitchell said: ↑You really need to learn what a red herring is.Click to expand...
According to your "red herring" the founding fathers were guilty of "demonizing business" by voicing their fear and mistrust of corporations.
I hope we shall crush in its birth the aristocracy of our monied corporations which dare already to challenge our government to a trial by strength, and bid defiance to the laws of our country. Thomas JeffersonClick to expand...The power of all corporations ought to be limited, […] the growing wealth acquired by them never fails to be a source of abuses. James MadisonClick to expand...If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their money, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them (around the banks), will deprive the people of their property until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered. Thomas JeffersonClick to expand...In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. Dwight D. EisenhowerClick to expand...
I presume that in your view Thomas Jefferson, James Madison and Dwight D. Eisenhower were all guilty of pushing "wild conspiracy theories" and "demonizing business" also. Am I correct?
Is that the sound of crickets approaching I hear?
Does Wall Street Call the Shots at the FBI?
It is clear to most Americans that Wall Street’s financing of presidential and congressional campaigns is creating too many pals wearing blindfolds about epic corruption on Wall Street. The President, subject to Senate confirmation, selects the U.S. Treasury Secretary, the Chair of the Federal Reserve, the Chair of the Securities and Exchange Commission – all of whom regulate Wall Street, for better or worse. Given that Wall Street collapsed the U.S. financial system in 2008 and has been perpetually charged with new crimes ever since, there is the strong suggestion that regulation isn’t strong enough.
The President also selects the U.S. Attorney General at the Justice Department, the office that can bring criminal charges against Wall Street. But according to a January 2013 report by the PBS program, Frontline, in the years following the 2008 collapse there was no serious effort at the Justice Department to indict the miscreants. The exchange went as follows between Frontline producer and investigator, Martin Smith, and Lanny Breuer, then head of the Criminal Division at the Justice Department:
< snip >
There are many other reasons to question the coziness of Wall Street with law enforcement, not the least of which is the fact that it co-staffs a high-tech surveillance center with the New York Police Department in lower Manhattan and has, at least in the past, been allowed to rent uniformed cops with the power to arrest from the NYPD.
The FBI lists its motto as: “Fidelity, Bravery, and Integrity.” If Americans are not confident that those goals are real, crimes will cease to be reported to the FBI; corruption will gain an even greater foothold than it already has across America. For that reason alone, Congress needs to hold comprehensive hearings on the undue influence that Wall Street is wielding in our government. It could provide the basis for genuine campaign finance reform; restrictions on the revolving door; and restoration of confidence in America’s institutions, many of which are hovering at or near historic lows.
Read More At: http://wallstreetonparade.com/2015/05/does-wall-street-call-the-shots-at-the-fbi/ -
How predictable, ask the Rev a couple questions and the only thing we hear is . . . https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Re72di5phM0