Letters to the Editor
bucky1
Published Letters: 1714
-
re: USA, Inc.
[Read the article: The Republican Party is the party of Bush]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]LaL:
The term "corporate welfare" comprehends many more phenomena than most people realize.
Consider these examples provided by political scientist Bertram Gross, in *Friendly Fascism*,
"Although it is perfectly true, as conservative economists insist, that "there are no free lunches," there are scores of corporate "free lunchers" who manage to get other people-via government intervention-to pick up all or part of the bill. Although new forms of this fine-tuned intervention are created every year, ...
Here in this town, we have decided to build a nice $500,000,000 stadium for the billionaire owner of the local team. The poor will pay for it, of course. At the same time, it became illegal to feed the homeless downtown.
So, millions for a billionaire, but you can go to jail if you give a sandwich to a homeless vet.
USA, Inc. just as you say.
(PS: how can one damn building cost so much?)
-b1
-
re: When Corporations Rule the World
[Read the article: The Republican Party is the party of Bush]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]"... the U.S. Supreme Court decided that a private corporation is a person and entitled to the legal rights and protections the Constitutions affords to any person. Because the Constitution makes no mention of corporations, it is a fairly clear case of the Court's taking it upon itself to rewrite the Constitution. ..."
My good Catholic friend (liberal of course) rails on about corporations all the time. But, I have never heard any politician with a plan to correct this error.
I think our friends in the Democratic Party would rather yell about bad corporations rather than fix the problem and lose all that cash they get. The Republicans seem hopeless on this issue.
Hell, even Rockwell has a blind spot on that one apparently.
-
As always, LWM just does not get it
[Read the article: The Republican Party is the party of Bush]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]b1 "... I think our friends in the Democratic Party would rather yell about bad corporations rather than fix the problem and lose all that cash they get. The Republicans seem hopeless on this issue. ..."
LWM "... Only one glaring factual error. It's called campaign finance reform. Perhaps you've heard of it? ..."
I'll respond to this one only because this comment set seems over and it wil not hurt Glenn's bolg to respond to a ... well, whatever you are.
The issue LaL talked about will never be cured by "campaign finance reform" except in the propaganda statements of both parties. Campaign finance "reform" is often "bipartisan" for the very reason that the issue is simply to fool the public.
What he was referring to has been decried on the far-left, left, and moderate-left for years. It has also been decried in the middle. You can not have a fair economic game if the large players receive an extraordinary legal benefit.
I am somewhat surprised that you are against that. I realize the fog of hate you look through can made discerning the essentials of an issue very hard for you --- but this issue is not a "libertarian" only issue. The left has talked about this for years; but Democratic Party congressional members did not take it on back when they ruled government entirely, and of course the Repugs did not.
But hey, if it makes you feel more like a sentient being to continually call me names and insult my intelligence --- go for it. The truth will come out eventually as to what you are.
-
re: Huh?
[Read the article: The Republican Party is the party of Bush]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]... You stopped making any sense days ago ...
Now that was funny. You can read '... The term "corporate welfare" comprehends many more phenomena than most people realize. ...' and turn that into "campaign finance reform". bejesus!
stupid is as stupid writes.
-
"Democratic President Would End War"
[Read the article: New disappearance revelations]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20070609/democrats-iraq/
Dean: "Democratic President Would End War"
Howard Dean claims that we can end the war in Iraq (Afganistan also?) by electing a Democrat to President in 2008.
If he is correct, that would mean any reason at all for these horrible "extraordinary rendition" of children that Glenn highlighted in his latest blog entry. (adults too, one could hope)
I think we can say at this point that, baring nuclear war before the elections, that the Democrats will win. Will the next Democratic Administration pull out of Iraq? Afghanistan? Will they bring the troops home or only redeploy?
-
heap big medicine
[Read the article: New disappearance revelations]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]"... I'm surprised that he [Bush] hasn't been canvassing Native Americans looking for a medicine man who can make heap big medicine."
I liked that one. :-)
Then I thought: "how do we know he has not?"