wdw505's Comments (12771)

“You obviously approve of deception - typical Repub.”

“I think the problem is that Palin is trying to deceive her mindless, welfare followers into believing that she is one of them.”

“Or a bus rider.”

“drlouise -------yes it is, if their views are in line with mine”

“So I suppose you think it is ok to let them decide on personal values like gay marriage and abortion.”

“not moved on from that? yea, I mean c'mon, it's only a war, wait 2 wars, 2 towers down, thousands upon thousands killed, trillions upon trillions of money lost. No biggie. God you are thick.

You think the repercussions from all of that are gone after a new president has been in office for a year? Get real.”

“wdw505, not moving from it because we're still suffering the consequences of it. When Obama minimizes or eliminates those consequences, and I think he's set an amazing stage to do that for us, sure we'll move ...”

“Jeff1958

there is a difference between learning from history and dwelling on it”

“What's your problem? Apparently you've never heard the expression, "Those who ignore the past are doomed to repeat it."”

“Screw the American people?

Yeah, that's what the Republicans have been sent to do.

By the corporations that own them.

If you think they care the slightest it about you. You are absolutely wrong.”

“Typical anti-American sentiment.”

“Well, they all did spend a lot of money. Funny, though, that Clinton was the one who actually came closest to balancing the books.”

“That turns the rule of "One Person, One Vote" into "One Dollar, Per Vote".”

“Thank you for clearly stating what has been at the heart of the problem since the "legal precedent" for Corporate Personhood was set (erroneously) by a clerk of the Supreme Court some 150 years ago.

The second half of your comment is absolutely correct, but fails to take in the big picture because of your notion expressed in the first half of your comment.

Any "entity" can be hurt by bad votes and laws! No doubt about it! But so what? A "bad law" gets passed, and an "entity" is hurt (e.g. it doesn't make as much money as it would otherwise have made) and? This might "hurt" real people (stockholders, owners, employees) but to what extent? They might not make as much money? Some might lose jobs? The business owner might have to close up?

Boo-freaking-hoo!

As it stands now, all those things happen with great regularity! They happen in spite of, and sometimes because of, laws that are passed at the urging of "Corporate Citizens", that are intended to benefit business. Meanwhile, those laws often result in REAL PEOPLE being injured. What kind of injuries? Loss of limbs, health, life! Financial ruin, and personal ruin! In-other-words, REAL INJURY!

The notion that the injury suffered by a corporate "entity" is somehow comparable to the injury suffered by an individual (human) being is simply mis-guided, callous, and ludicrous.”

“Agreed...I just don't like the money to buy the influence but I think we are stuck with it.”

“Individuals of the entity could give money in the entity's best interest; but the entity itself should not be allowed to contribute.”

“Oh, please, my de@d cat was a better alternative than Dubya.”

“Since you are such a constitutional scholar, apparently one who would subscribe to the literal interpretation, where does it provide for an Air Force?”

“Can you hired Palin even her English isn't Standard as you would like?”

“I'm Grunty. I'm not BabblingBrooks”

“wdw505
-=-=-=-=-=
You conducted yourself with honesty,re­spectful,w­hy start now
disrespecting others because they disagree with you?”