Koch ally to introduce Monsanto-backed bill to bar state GMO labeling laws

I would love to see more billionaires contributing to the politicians I support,myself.

Even if it means that these politicians must partake in the business of basic human rights violations that often serve the growth model of some of these billionaires?

No, thank you. When it comes to growth versus survival I'll take survival any day. In that regard, changing the course of history through transparency is far more important than just trying to get elected because it's the only way to genuinly see who speaks for whom in the old representation department.

Regardless of that, all any of these so called statesmen have to do if they think they are being shown in a wrong way is to provide a position on these sciences. It's simple enough. What are they afraid of?
 
Last edited:
Did I and thousands of others who maxed out on 12/16/2007 resulting in the biggest payday ever for a politician try to buy Ron Paul?

Have I and everybody else who has donated to Rand Paul,Amash,Massie,Greg Brannon and others,many through this very website through countless monybombs tried to buy these politicians?

I would love to see more billionaires contributing to the politicians I support,myself.


That's apples and bowling balls. Grassroots Vs. Billionaires.
 
Why would anybody bother to co-opt the movement? There's nothing to co-opt if we don't win elections. Therefore, I'm here to win elections, since this is a political activism forum. People who support the candidates that I support are my allies.

I am not here to tell people the "truth" about 9/11. I'm not here to tell people the "truth" about the Koch brothers. I'm not here to convince people that corporations are evil but the government is good. I am not here to convince people that the federal government should label our food.

And I'm certainly not here to bad mouth people who vote the way I want them to 95% of the time.

I am here to win elections. You don't want to win elections. You have stated that. If that's your idea of a movement, the movement to cry on election day no matter who wins, then you deserve to be co-opted, because absolutely nothing positive has ever come from that.
Why would anyone want to co-opt the movement?

Because, by ourselves, we may not be enough to win an election....but we there are enough of us to pull the election one way or the other if we refuse to vote for the candidate Team Red allows us to have (see: Romney, 2012).

I am here to win elections. You don't want to win elections.

No, Angela. It's not that I just don't want to win elections. But I want the win to be meaningful. I don't want to just "rah-rah" for Team Red because liberals stink.

I want what I've always wanted, even before I signed up here....I want the government to leave me alone. Yes, I'm aware of how idealistic that sounds; but if it can't be that way, I'm not really interested in picking a side to lord over me. I used to play the lesser of two evils game, but no longer. There is as much corruption from Koch money as there is from Soros money. No one is immune to the lure of that much money.
 
Uhm, If I had billions I'd like to think that I would donate millions to the campaigns of people that would promote and vote for pro-freedom legislation in D.C.. I take it that you wouldn't.
You and I aren't even allowed to donate that much money. Now, why would they restrict you and I to a few thousand, but the Koch's and Soros' of the world are unlimited? Hmmmm.....
 
Did I and thousands of others who maxed out on 12/16/2007 resulting in the biggest payday ever for a politician try to buy Ron Paul?

Have I and everybody else who has donated to Rand Paul,Amash,Massie,Greg Brannon and others,many through this very website through countless monybombs tried to buy these politicians?

I would love to see more billionaires contributing to the politicians I support,myself.
LOL....This gets to everything that is wrong with our current system.

You and I have no influence with the small amount we are allowed to donate to a candidate.

Corporations, organizations, bundlers....that's where the influence comes from. And they can literally donate millions. Ever wonder why it's the insurance companies who had influence over the Obamacare bill? Or why the MIC has influence over our foreign policy? Duh. They don't have to listen to us as long as the millions roll in from those who campaign finance laws don't touch.
 
Uhm, If I had billions I'd like to think that I would donate millions to the campaigns of people that would promote and vote for pro-freedom legislation in D.C.. I take it that you wouldn't.


You know what no one should have to pay any money to these campaigns and politicians. It's too easy for politicians to be bought off in the country anyway. It all should be done by grassroots efforts.
 
You and I aren't even allowed to donate that much money. Now, why would they restrict you and I to a few thousand, but the Koch's and Soros' of the world are unlimited? Hmmmm.....
I'm not sure if you really think they dont' have to follow the same laws. no, they can't donate that much directly. But they (and you and I) can spend unlimited amounts (except the size of your pocketbook) through independent expenditures.
 
You know what no one should have to pay any money to these campaigns and politicians. It's too easy for politicians to be bought off in the country anyway. It all should be done by grassroots efforts.

So there is something inherent in being a billionaire that precludes them from being part of the grassroots?
 
So if you hit the lottery tomorrow for $400,000,000 you wouldn't up your political donations by several thousands percent?

I would.
I can't. What part of that don't you understand? There are annual limits to how much an individual can contribute to a campaign.
 
LOL....This gets to everything that is wrong with our current system.

You and I have no influence with the small amount we are allowed to donate to a candidate.

Corporations, organizations, bundlers....that's where the influence comes from. And they can literally donate millions. Ever wonder why it's the insurance companies who had influence over the Obamacare bill? Or why the MIC has influence over our foreign policy? Duh. They don't have to listen to us as long as the millions roll in from those who campaign finance laws don't touch.

They can personally donate the exact same amount that you or I can to a candidate.They can donate millions to PACS and such.

So if you hit the lottery tomorrow for $400,000,000 you wouldn't up your political donations by several thousands percent?

Once again,I would.
 
So if you hit the lottery tomorrow for $400,000,000 you wouldn't up your political donations by several thousands percent?

I would.

Nope. I would use that money to educate the people on the corruption in this government. I would give a chuck of it to Ron Paul because he has been doing a halvah job in educating the people. You know how you win, by getting the people to wake up and stop compromising liberty. There is more of us then there is of them.
 
So there is something inherent in being a billionaire that precludes them from being part of the grassroots?

Yeah, because they wouldn't be billionaires if they didn't get the laws they needed to make the big profits. That's how this cronyism works.
 
They can personally donate the exact same amount that you or I can to a candidate.They can donate millions to PACS and such.

So if you hit the lottery tomorrow for $400,000,000 you wouldn't up your political donations by several thousands percent?

Once again,I would.
No, I wouldn't. The money would probably be better spent in many other ways, such as getting prepared for the coming collapse.

And, as donnay said, sending a bigger chunk to Ron's Institute would also be a better use...without education, any gains will be only temporary.
 
Yeah, because they wouldn't be billionaires if they didn't get the laws they needed to make the big profits. That's how this cronyism works.
Why is that so difficult to understand? Those people don't play by the same rules we do. They don't need no stinkin' rules!!
 
No, I wouldn't. The money would probably be better spent in many other ways, such as getting prepared for the coming collapse.

And, as donnay said, sending a bigger chunk to Ron's Institute would also be a better use...without education, any gains will be only temporary.

Four hundred million would buy you a lot of MRE's,I'll give you that.Maybe even money left over for a water purifier and a .22 rifle and maybe even a few silver American Eagles.
 


The landmark ruling in the case of McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission will not directly impact a law that currently keeps Americans from legally being able to contribute more than $2,600 apiece to individual candidates running for federal office each two-year period. It does, however, erase a so-called “aggregate cap” of $123,200 that up until now prevented people from contributing a combined total of more than $48,600 to the candidates of their choice and $74,000 on parties and Political Action Committees, or PACS, each cycle.

Plaintiff Shaun McCutcheon, a conservative electrical engineer from Alabama, insisted that the limits in place hindered his freedom of speech because it prohibited his ability to donate freely to the politicians he favored. During the last cycle, McCutcheon contributed the symbolically significant amount of $1,776 apiece to a total of 15 right-leaning candidates running for Congress, but FEC restrictions prohibited him from spending much more because signing checks to other candidates would have quickly put him over the aggregate cap.

"It's about freedom of speech and your right to spend your money on as many candidates as you choose. It's a basic freedom," he said ahead of Wednesday’s ruling.

This week’s decision leaves in place the limit of $2,600 applied to contributions made out to individual candidates, but rescinds the threshold that relegated how much money in all can be spent during two-year election cycles, opening the door for people like McCutcheon to be able to write $2,600 checks to as many candidates as they’d wish while allowing them to open their wallets to PACs and parties

So you are against this ruling?
 
Back
Top