Mineral Man, so reasonable and calm, he's the DU elder pedodophile

[JakeStyle]

Star Member MineralMan (62,777 posts)        Wed Apr 2, 2014, 10:23 AM

In My Opinion, The Only Really Useful Reaction to the SCOTUS Decision Is: [View all]
Use this decision in our GOTV and campaign efforts for the 2014 Congressional elections. Help people who think voting doesn't matter to understand how this SCOTUS decision means that their vote this year matters more than it ever has. The SCOTUS ruling was by five angry Republican appointees who want to limit the power of the voter and give that power to the rich.

We need to explain this emphatically in 2014 and in future elections and convince people to turn out in unprecedented numbers and Take Congress Back from the Republicans! Then we can, though progressive legislation, and maybe even a Constitutional Amendment, give the power back to the voter.

SCOTUS has ruled. No amount of objection to that ruling will change that ruling. Instead, we need to protest this by turning out the largest percentage of Democratic voters ever seen in November. We need to use this ruling to stimulate that turnout. Every last DUer needs to take part in this and to encourage everyone else to do the same.

GOTV 2014 and Beyond!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4770172

[Ralph Wiggum]

The SCOTUS ruling was by five angry Republican appointees

 

Want to go that way, RockHead?  The SCOTUS ruling was OPPOSED by four angry liberal goons.

[dane]

Star Member MineralMan (62,777 posts)        Wed Apr 2, 2014, 10:23 AM

In My Opinion, The Only Really Useful Reaction to the SCOTUS Decision Is: [View all]
Use this decision in our GOTV and campaign efforts for the 2014 Congressional elections. Help people who think voting doesn't matter to understand how this SCOTUS decision means that their vote this year matters more than it ever has. The SCOTUS ruling was by five angry Republican appointees who want to limit the power of the voter and give that power to the rich.

People who have no federal income tax burden should not have a voice in choosing the people who decide how the federal tax money is spent.  Or at most, a very limited voice.  In my opinion

[thundley4]

Want to go that way, RockHead?  The SCOTUS ruling was OPPOSED by four angry liberal goons.

Who favor an uneven playing ground that lets unions make unlimited donations/bribes, but doesn't let individuals do the same thing.

[jukin]

People who have no federal income tax burden should not have a voice in choosing the people who decide how the federal tax money is spent.  Or at most, a very limited voice.  In my opinion

I like that but Like Dr. Walter Williams plan better. He wants to limit money to politicians cutting off unions and their huge advantage in funding progressive fascists. Everyone gets ONE VOTE. For each $10,000 (I forget the exact amount) on federal income tax you get another vote. Just like any company would be run.

[obumazombie]

I like that but Like Dr. Walter Williams plan better. He wants to limit money to politicians cutting off unions and their huge advantage in funding progressive fascists. Everyone gets ONE VOTE. For each $10,000 (I forget the exact amount) on federal income tax you get another vote. Just like any company would be run.

I am a big fan of Walter Williams, and of course I support the idea of tying votes to tax burden. The heavy lifters shouldn't have to shoulder more burden at the whim of the takers. I would venture to guess the basic idea behind WW's plan had originated in my mind, before it occurred to him, but that would be sheer speculation on my part. Just saying that to give an idea of the long time I have cherished such a thought.