Fuck its silent in here.......

[Gil Gunderson]

THIS

I love how the basic premise of Chapman's article is that American citizens are rational and will respond to unrestrained spending by corporations rationally, when in reality, Americans are dumb mouthbreathers who will believe whatever the cute guy with the British accent says on the teevee.

My simple opinion, money =/= speech.  Simple as that.

[Gil Gunderson]

DPD, this is not to say that all the DOOM is justified over CU.  If Congress responds by making CEO's or other high-level executives "own" their ads by using the "I'm Steve Jobs and I approve this message" language from McCain-Feingold, I don't think companies will go nuts for fear of alienating their customers.

Also, corporations previously funneled money to vague and amorphous PACs, so having a company do its dirty work for itself might be a bit better.  Sunlight is still the best disinfectant.

[morpheus]

DPD, this is not to say that all the DOOM is justified over CU.  If Congress responds by making CEO's or other high-level executives "own" their ads by using the "I'm Steve Jobs and I approve this message" language from McCain-Feingold, I don't think companies will go nuts for fear of alienating their customers.

Also, corporations previously funneled money to vague and amorphous PACs, so having a company do its dirty work for itself might be a bit better.  Sunlight is still the best disinfectant.

I was just preparing a response to the effect of "they don't want to antagonize customers."  You're absolutely right that sunlight is the best disinfectant.

[Gil Gunderson]

DPD, this is not to say that all the DOOM is justified over CU.  If Congress responds by making CEO's or other high-level executives "own" their ads by using the "I'm Steve Jobs and I approve this message" language from McCain-Feingold, I don't think companies will go nuts for fear of alienating their customers.

Also, corporations previously funneled money to vague and amorphous PACs, so having a company do its dirty work for itself might be a bit better.  Sunlight is still the best disinfectant.

I was just preparing a response to the effect of "they don't want to antagonize customers."  You're absolutely right that sunlight is the best disinfectant.

I've been reading about some of the Congressional response to this decision.  Since it is a constitutional interpretation, rather than a statutory construction, legislation is going to be pretty weak compared to the force of "simply" amending the constitution.  However, I've read something to the effect of altering shareholder power, or giving shareholders more authority over corporate spending.  I'll defer to morph for his thoughts on this, but I thought that corporate governance in the US was pretty ineffective to begin with.

[morpheus]

DPD, this is not to say that all the DOOM is justified over CU.  If Congress responds by making CEO's or other high-level executives "own" their ads by using the "I'm Steve Jobs and I approve this message" language from McCain-Feingold, I don't think companies will go nuts for fear of alienating their customers.

Also, corporations previously funneled money to vague and amorphous PACs, so having a company do its dirty work for itself might be a bit better.  Sunlight is still the best disinfectant.

I was just preparing a response to the effect of "they don't want to antagonize customers."  You're absolutely right that sunlight is the best disinfectant.

I've been reading about some of the Congressional response to this decision.  Since it is a constitutional interpretation, rather than a statutory construction, legislation is going to be pretty weak compared to the force of "simply" amending the constitution.  However, I've read something to the effect of altering shareholder power, or giving shareholders more authority over corporate spending.  I'll defer to morph for his thoughts on this, but I thought that corporate governance in the US was pretty ineffective to begin with.

Corporate governance...  as it is now, in general terms, the shareholders elect the board of directors, who then hire the CEOs and other top-level execs and so on.  The only power shareholders really have is in who they elect to the board.  Now, institutional investor shareholders tend to be much more engaged in the process, but that's only relative to individual investors, who generally tend to vote "yes" or "present" on their proxy ballots.  I also don't know how the government could come in and change the rules, though, from a legal standpoint.  You'd be talking about rewriting corporate bylaws on a massive scale.  Stuff I've seen to date all is worded "corporate bylaws would be allowed to require [shareholder director nominees, proxy election cost reimbursement, etc.]" but then the corporations would still have to actually re-write the bylaws to include these provisions. 

I'm also not sure, from a practical standpoint, how shareholders could have a meaningful impact on corporate spending; normally if your company is spending its cash on stuff you don't think it should be, you would just sell the shares and buy those of a competitor who is more aligned with your interests.  "Socially Responsible Investing" is somewhat related to this concept - they won't hold shares of a company that engages in certain business practices (different depending on the focus of the fund).  See http://www.socialinvest.org/ .  Check out the "screening & advocacy" page - there are funds that only invest in companies which are deemed to have a positive impact on "Board Issues" or "Executive Pay" as examples.

[Quality Start Machine]

Corporate governance...  as it is now, in general terms, the shareholders elect the board of directors, who then hire the CEOs and other top-level execs and so on.  The only power shareholders really have is in who they elect to the board.  Now, institutional investor shareholders tend to be much more engaged in the process, but that's only relative to individual investors, who generally tend to vote "yes" or "present" on their proxy ballots.  I also don't know how the government could come in and change the rules, though, from a legal standpoint.  You'd be talking about rewriting corporate bylaws on a massive scale.  Stuff I've seen to date all is worded "corporate bylaws would be allowed to require [shareholder director nominees, proxy election cost reimbursement, etc.]" but then the corporations would still have to actually re-write the bylaws to include these provisions. 

I'm also not sure, from a practical standpoint, how shareholders could have a meaningful impact on corporate spending; normally if your company is spending its cash on stuff you don't think it should be, you would just sell the shares and buy those of a competitor who is more aligned with your interests.  "Socially Responsible Investing" is somewhat related to this concept - they won't hold shares of a company that engages in certain business practices (different depending on the focus of the fund).  See http://www.socialinvest.org/ .  Check out the "screening & advocacy" page - there are funds that only invest in companies which are deemed to have a positive impact on "Board Issues" or "Executive Pay" as examples.

Not to mention, proxy ballots are breathtaking examples of double-and-triplespeak.

But, yeah, this is an area the Gubment needs to stay the fuck out of. Divestment is the most profound "no" vote one can have.

[Chuck to Chuck]

DPD, this is not to say that all the DOOM is justified over CU.  If Congress responds by making CEO's or other high-level executives "own" their ads by using the "I'm Steve Jobs and I approve this message" language from McCain-Feingold, I don't think companies will go nuts for fear of alienating their customers.

Also, corporations previously funneled money to vague and amorphous PACs, so having a company do its dirty work for itself might be a bit better.  Sunlight is still the best disinfectant.

I was just preparing a response to the effect of "they don't want to antagonize customers."  You're absolutely right that sunlight is the best disinfectant.

Not according to Clarence Thomas.

[JD]

DPD, this is not to say that all the DOOM is justified over CU.  If Congress responds by making CEO's or other high-level executives "own" their ads by using the "I'm Steve Jobs and I approve this message" language from McCain-Feingold, I don't think companies will go nuts for fear of alienating their customers.

Also, corporations previously funneled money to vague and amorphous PACs, so having a company do its dirty work for itself might be a bit better.  Sunlight is still the best disinfectant.

I was just preparing a response to the effect of "they don't want to antagonize customers."  You're absolutely right that sunlight is the best disinfectant.

Not according to Clarence Thomas.

Because he's black?  You racist.

[Chuck to Chuck]

DPD, this is not to say that all the DOOM is justified over CU.  If Congress responds by making CEO's or other high-level executives "own" their ads by using the "I'm Steve Jobs and I approve this message" language from McCain-Feingold, I don't think companies will go nuts for fear of alienating their customers.

Also, corporations previously funneled money to vague and amorphous PACs, so having a company do its dirty work for itself might be a bit better.  Sunlight is still the best disinfectant.

I was just preparing a response to the effect of "they don't want to antagonize customers."  You're absolutely right that sunlight is the best disinfectant.

Not according to Clarence Thomas.

Because he's black?  You racist.

No.  Because he drinks Coca Cola with pubic hair in it.

[Slaky]

At least we don't have to worry about that damned health care bill anymore.

[JD]

DPD, this is not to say that all the DOOM is justified over CU.  If Congress responds by making CEO's or other high-level executives "own" their ads by using the "I'm Steve Jobs and I approve this message" language from McCain-Feingold, I don't think companies will go nuts for fear of alienating their customers.

Also, corporations previously funneled money to vague and amorphous PACs, so having a company do its dirty work for itself might be a bit better.  Sunlight is still the best disinfectant.

I was just preparing a response to the effect of "they don't want to antagonize customers."  You're absolutely right that sunlight is the best disinfectant.

Not according to Clarence Thomas.

Because he's black?  You racist.

No.  Because he drinks Coca Cola with pubic hair in it.

Oh.  Well, pubic hairs are black, too.  You're still racist.

[Gil Gunderson]

DPD, this is not to say that all the DOOM is justified over CU.  If Congress responds by making CEO's or other high-level executives "own" their ads by using the "I'm Steve Jobs and I approve this message" language from McCain-Feingold, I don't think companies will go nuts for fear of alienating their customers.

Also, corporations previously funneled money to vague and amorphous PACs, so having a company do its dirty work for itself might be a bit better.  Sunlight is still the best disinfectant.

I was just preparing a response to the effect of "they don't want to antagonize customers."  You're absolutely right that sunlight is the best disinfectant.

Not according to Clarence Thomas.

Because he's black?  You racist.

No.  Because he drinks Coca Cola with pubic hair in it.

Oh.  Well, pubic hairs are black, too.  You're still racist.

They are?

[JD]

DPD, this is not to say that all the DOOM is justified over CU.  If Congress responds by making CEO's or other high-level executives "own" their ads by using the "I'm Steve Jobs and I approve this message" language from McCain-Feingold, I don't think companies will go nuts for fear of alienating their customers.

Also, corporations previously funneled money to vague and amorphous PACs, so having a company do its dirty work for itself might be a bit better.  Sunlight is still the best disinfectant.

I was just preparing a response to the effect of "they don't want to antagonize customers."  You're absolutely right that sunlight is the best disinfectant.

Not according to Clarence Thomas.

Because he's black?  You racist.

No.  Because he drinks Coca Cola with pubic hair in it.

Oh.  Well, pubic hairs are black, too.  You're still racist.

They are?

Yes.  All of 'em.  If you've seen some of a different color, then you're not really looking at pubic hairs.

[Jon]

South Carolina CLASS...

http://www.thestate.com/local/story/1123844.html

GREENVILLE - Lt. Gov. Andre Bauer has compared giving people government assistance to "feeding stray animals."

Bauer, who is running for the Republican nomination for governor, made his remarks during a town hall meeting in Fountain Inn that included state lawmakers and about 115 residents.

"My grandmother was not a highly educated woman, but she told me as a small child to quit feeding stray animals. You know why? Because they breed. You're facilitating the problem if you give an animal or a person ample food supply. They will reproduce, especially ones that don't think too much further than that. And so what you've got to do is you've got to curtail that type of behavior. They don't know any better," Bauer said.

In South Carolina, 58 percent of students participate in the free and reduced-price lunch program.

...

Bauer later Friday told The Greenville News he wasn't saying people on government assistance "were animals or anything else."

Later in his speech, Bauer said, "I can show you a bar graph where free and reduced lunch has the worst test scores in the state of South Carolina," adding, "You show me the school that has the highest free and reduced lunch, and I'll show you the worst test scores, folks. It's there, period.

Correlation = causation!

Free lunches make kids poor, dumb and lazy!

Period.

And, Bauer said, it is time to confront "babies having babies. Somebody's got to talk about. Politicians don't want to talk about it anymore because it's politically incorrect."

The third rail of SC politics: infant pregnancy.

Don't make me fetch my debatin' stick...

[Gil Gunderson]

DPD, this is not to say that all the DOOM is justified over CU.  If Congress responds by making CEO's or other high-level executives "own" their ads by using the "I'm Steve Jobs and I approve this message" language from McCain-Feingold, I don't think companies will go nuts for fear of alienating their customers.

Also, corporations previously funneled money to vague and amorphous PACs, so having a company do its dirty work for itself might be a bit better.  Sunlight is still the best disinfectant.

I was just preparing a response to the effect of "they don't want to antagonize customers."  You're absolutely right that sunlight is the best disinfectant.

Not according to Clarence Thomas.

Because he's black?  You racist.

No.  Because he drinks Coca Cola with pubic hair in it.

Oh.  Well, pubic hairs are black, too.  You're still racist.

They are?

Yes.  All of 'em.  If you've seen some of a different color, then you're not really looking at pubic hairs.

Sonofabitch.