Friday, January 13, 2012

Citizens United

http://www.opposingviews.com/i/politics/2012-election/mitt-romney-son-citizens-united
Excerpt:
Romney, in other words, is the candidate Citizens United created, the creature given life by Scalia, Roberts, Kennedy, Thomas, and Alito all playing Dr. Frankenstein.
Given what the Court has wrought, my conscience is less burdened. Had I whipped Romney's ass ten years ago I might only have delayed his awakening. But I fear for the country.
Robert Reich is the author of Aftershock: The Next Economy and America's Future, now in bookstores. This post originally appeared at RobertReich.org.

http://www.dscc.org/act4?action_KEY=333&track=SEM_GS_SuperPAC-S_CU-Name_Citizens%20united_21320488052
Excerpt:
The Citizens United ruling has brought a flood of shadowy, corporate money into our political process. It’s an attack on our democracy. In a system where one person, one vote is supposed to be the rule, huge corporations are having an outsized influence. Now, a group of Democratic senators has introduced a constitutional amendment to limit corporate influence in elections.

Sign our petition, and demand passage of the Reverse Citizens United Amendment. Voters need to have the biggest voice in our democracy, not corporate-financed special interests.

http://www.thenation.com/blog/163685/big-business-undo-damage-citizens-united
Excerpt:
George Zornic

Big Business: Undo the Damage of 'Citizens United'

Massive amounts of money will be spent to influence upcoming federal elections, and if recent history is any guide, at least half of it will be totally secret. We won’t know who donated the money, nor for what exact purpose. In 2010, political committees and organizations spent $298 million—four times what was spent in the 2006 midterms—and about 50 percent was undisclosed.
A report released Monday says this raging river of secret cash has the potential to create massive scandal and distort the democratic process, and it calls for complete transparency of political donations and public financing options for federal campaigns. That’s not a particularly remarkable conclusion, but what’s notable is who issued the report.
Hidden Money: The Need for Transparency in Political Finance” was signed by thirty-two business leaders and university professors—including representatives from Citigroup, Prudential Financial and others. Executives from the pharmaceutical companies Pfizer and Merck helped promote the findings at a public event this week.

http://www.thinkbabynames.com/meaning/1/Willard
Excerpt:
lard \wi-lla-rd\ as a boy's name is pronounced WIL-erd. It is of Old English origin, and the meaning of Willard is "strong desire". From Wilheard.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lenore_Romney
Excerpt:
 By early 1970, Nixon decided he wanted George Romney out of his administration.[13] Nixon, who hated having to fire people[14] and was, as Ehrlichman later described, "notoriously inadept" at it,[15] instead hatched a plot to get Romney to run in the 1970 U.S. Senate race in Michigan.[13] Lenore Romney ended up running instead. After winning a tight nominating contest against Robert Huber, a conservative state senator from Oakland County, Lenore Romney lost the general election to popular Incumbent Democrat Senator Philip A. Hart, who won re-election handily with 67% of the vote.

Mitt Romney Says He Likes To Fire People
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TlvJvTDxlTY

http://www.dailywordofgodgroup.com/helping-others.htm
Excerpt:
This focused on his wealth and caused the rich man to become very sorrowful because his money was obviously most important to him.
However, Jesus clearly makes service to others the last indication of fitness for eternal life aside from keeping the ten commandments.
Therefore real wealth involves following Jesus by living not to be served, but to serve others and to devote one's life to the well being of others.


http://gypsiesroma.blogspot.com/2007/12/romney-gypsies-other-roots-of-romney.html#!/2007/12/romney-gypsies-other-roots-of-romney.html
Excerpt:
Even in our family, people from Sweden who apparently dropped the plebeian name for children that would have been "Andersson" for the sons, and Andersdotter for the daughters -- were following the naming custom where simple farmers (as opposed to the nobility) just identified their offspring as so and so's son, or so and so's daughter. 

http://gypsiesroma.blogspot.com/2007/10/romney-surname-from-english-gypsies.html#!/2007/10/romney-surname-from-english-gypsies.html
Excerpt:
Romney - Rom'nie --Surname from English Gypsies? Romnichel. Romani. Family trees. Romany surnames, see ://www.20000-names.com/gypsy_names.htm
The Romnichels are a distinct group of Gypsies, with origins in England. Derivations include Rom'nie. Sounds similar to Romany, the term in older literature for Gypsies, or Romani. Or Romney.
We have an interest in geneology as it may or may not be evidenced in last names, for recreational thought, and here focus on the last name, Romney. The Gypsy Lore Society addresses the Romnichels or Rom'nie, at ://www.gypsyloresociety.org/cultureintro.html. .
Actual Romneys may well have their own family tradition of origins, but the name Romney - Rom'nie standing alone suggests English Gypsy roots: dealing in draft horses, horses for transporation, horse traders, basket makers and that term included making rustic furniture, and fortune telling.

http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/c/campaign_finance/index.html
Excerpt:

Campaign Finance


Updated: June 28, 2011
Money and politics have been troublesome bedfellows at least since the time of Caesar. In modern American politics, since the Watergate scandals Congress and the courts have engaged in a long wrestling match over what limits can be set on contributions. The latest round in the debate was opened in January 2010, when a bitterly divided Supreme Court ruled in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission that the government may not ban political spending by corporations in candidate elections.
The 5-to-4 decision was a doctrinal earthquake but also a political and practical one. Specialists in campaign finance law said they expected the decision, which also applies to labor unions and other organizations, to reshape the way elections are conducted.
The Supreme Court ruling was a vindication, the majority said, of the First Amendment's most basic free speech principle — that the government has no business regulating political speech. The dissenters said allowing corporate money to flood the political marketplace will corrupt democracy.
In its first campaign-finance decision since the Citizens United case, the justices in a 5-to-4 decision struck down an Arizona law in June 2011 that provided escalating matching funds to candidates who accept public financing. Writing for the majority, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. said, “Laws like Arizona’s matching funds provision that inhibit robust and wide-open political debate without sufficient justification cannot stand.”

Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission
Excerpt:

Justices, 5-4, Reject Corporate Spending Limit

    WASHINGTON — Overruling two important precedents about the First Amendment rights of corporations, a bitterly divided Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that the government may not ban political spending by corporations in candidate elections.
    Reuters, left; Bloomberg
    Justices Anthony M. Kennedy and John Paul Stevens, right.
    Luke Sharrett/The New York Times
    Dave Bossie, President of Citizens United, spoke to the press following Thursday’s Supreme Court decision.
    Lauren Victoria Burke/Associated Press
    Senator Charles E. Schumer, left, accompanied by Rep. Chris Van Hollen, spoke about campaign finance reform after the Supreme Court ruling on Thursday.

    Readers’ Comments

    Readers shared their thoughts on this article.
    The 5-to-4 decision was a vindication, the majority said, of the First Amendment’s most basic free speech principle — that the government has no business regulating political speech. The dissenters said that allowing corporate money to flood the political marketplace would corrupt democracy.
    The ruling represented a sharp doctrinal shift, and it will have major political and practical consequences. Specialists in campaign finance law said they expected the decision to reshape the way elections were conducted. Though the decision does not directly address them, its logic also applies to the labor unions that are often at political odds with big business.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sherrin
    Excerpt:
    Sherrin footballs are manufactured by Spalding, owned by Russell Corp Aus P/L, in Melbourne, Victoria, Australia from cow hide lined and machine-stitched

    cow
    Excerpt:

    Word origin

    Cattle did not originate as the term for bovine animals. It was borrowed from Old French catel, itself from Latin caput, head, and originally meant movable personal property, especially livestock of any kind, as opposed to real property (the land, which also included wild or small free-roaming animals such as chickens — they were sold as part of the land).[9] The word is closely related to "chattel" (a unit of personal property) and "capital" in the economic sense.[10][11] The term replaced earlier Old English feoh "cattle, property" (cf. German: Vieh, Gothic: faihu).
    The word cow came via Anglo-Saxon (plural ), from Common Indo-European gʷōus (genitive gʷowes) = "a bovine animal", compare Persian Gâv, Sanskrit go, Welsh buwch.[citation needed] The genitive plural of "cū" is "cȳna", which gave the now archaic English plural, and Scots plural, of "kine".
    In older English sources such as the King James Version of the Bible, "cattle" refers to livestock, as opposed to "deer" which refers to wildlife. "Wild cattle" may refer to feral cattle or to undomesticated species of the genus Bos. Today, when used without any other qualifier, the modern meaning of "cattle" is usually restricted to domesticated bovines.

    No comments:

    Post a Comment