Skip to main content

View Diary: You(person) vs. a Corporation(person): a comparison (18 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  And corps can't give at all. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Major Tom, Reepicheep, VClib

    They're flatly prohibited from contributing to candidates.

    •  But can give any amount (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Major Tom, Reepicheep

      anonymously, through third-party organizations.

      •  Clio - so can you (0+ / 0-)

        You can give any amount you would like, without disclosure, to American Crossroads. Corporations have no rights regarding campaign activity that individuals do not also have and corporations don't have some specific rights that individuals do have.

        "let's talk about that"

        by VClib on Tue Nov 16, 2010 at 06:33:56 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  What the hell difference does that make? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      wilderness voice

      So they make contributions to an independent expenditure entity like Karl Rove's little operation, which can run the same kind of ads as a candidate post-Citizens United, including making ads for or against a candidate by name.  And unlike a living, breathing human being, there is as yet no requirement we even know who these corporations (or people) are.  I'm not even sure if there's an obligation to tell shareholders, at least in any detail.

      So What's Your F***g Point?

      You can't govern if you can't tell the country where you are taking it. The plot of Obama's presidency has been harder to follow than "Inception." -- F. Rich

      by mbayrob on Tue Nov 16, 2010 at 05:32:36 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  That is so unjust. (0+ / 0-)

      In an equitable society, multi-billion dollar corporations would be allowed to contribute to candidates.

      "YOPP!" --Horton Hears a Who

      by Reepicheep on Tue Nov 16, 2010 at 11:10:45 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site