No one should be calling it a democracy, because on paper (see the Constitution) and in practice it isn't one. It's a republic.
True but somewhere along the line this part of a Republic's functions has gone astray ...
"By conventions of representatives, freely, fairly, and proportionately chosen . . . "
Now we have many representatives at the highest level (and most likely other levels), bought and paid for by minority interests, albeit the wealthiest, in both parties or so it seems to me.
It is amusing to observe how openly they do this. America = Lobbying. Other places in the world = Bribery. America the best country in the world that money can buy.
It is amusing to observe how openly they do this. America = Lobbying. Other places in the world = Bribery. America the best country in the world that money can buy.
It's a well worn meme for sure, and yes money buys power in the USA but just look around the rest of the planet. How many countries are run by those that attained power without substantial help, be that military, political or wealth.
True but somewhere along the line this part of a Republic's functions has gone astray ...
"By conventions of representatives, freely, fairly, and proportionately chosen . . . "
Now we have many representatives at the highest level (and most likely other levels), bought and paid for by minority interests, albeit the wealthiest, in both parties or so it seems to me.
When is everyone going to get out of this denial stage and acknowledge that this county is not about our constitution. It will always be trumped by money. Regardless of race, religion, political affiliation, economic status, gender or sexual orientation. In other words just about everyone is stuck in the money prison. You are beholden to someone in someway because you need money. You can live with out a constitution but not money. And so concludes my cynical rant of the day.
It is amusing to observe how openly they do this. America = Lobbying. Other places in the world = Bribery. America the best country in the world that money can buy.
By the way, 'lobbying' is an essential part of the process. It was intended to be how we the people communicate with our elected representatives. It is not the fault of the concept that it is abused. It is those that accept some financial gain in return for the lobbying efforts that should be locked up first IMHO. That problems is not limited to the US, check out the UK's history. Little boys in backrooms is a form of payment and keeping it hushed up certainly is too. Looking at you Cyril Smith.
Hello AI - WTF is this that you wrote in this article? "A high-profile iCloud breach in September resulted in a massive leak of compromising celebrity photos"
First, iCloud WAS NOT breached. Specific celebrity accounts were - those account holders used very poor judgement in setting up their passwords and were therefore hacked. Second, this did not happen in September, as it was not a single event. Various accounts had their passwords guessed over an extended period of time, and their content had been passed around over an extended period of time through various channels. This is a huge difference from iCloud being hacked. Please work on being more accurate in your reporting.
When is everyone going to get out of this denial stage and acknowledge that this county is not about our constitution. It will always be trumped by money. Regardless of race, religion, political affiliation, economic status, gender or sexual orientation. In other words just about everyone is stuck in the money prison. You are beholden to someone in someway because you need money. You can live with out a constitution but not money. And so concludes my cynical rant of the day.
Hello AI - WTF is this that you wrote in this article? "A high-profile iCloud breach in September resulted in a massive leak of compromising celebrity photos"
First, iCloud WAS NOT breached. Specific celebrity accounts were - those account holders used very poor judgement in setting up their passwords and were therefore hacked. Second, this did not happen in September, as it was not a single event. Various accounts had their passwords guessed over an extended period of time, and their content had been passed around over an extended period of time through various channels. This is a huge difference from iCloud being hacked. Please work on being more accurate in your reporting.
Agreed, idiocy in falling for phishing does not make a security breach. It would be like accusing a bank vault manufacturer of making a lousy safe because if you give your secretary the code her husband can rob it.
Only if it is allowed to be. Remove lobbying and how do a group of teachers from Iowa ask for some help? It is how we the people are supposed to get the attention of our elected officials. The difference is those teachers would not offer the elected official several million for his re election fund hidden in some super pac in return.
You don't believe that legislators need to be aware of all the issues involved with legislation they are planning to enact? Google, Apple and many others don't think legislative leaders have all the details at hand to make the right decisions. Lobbyists are tasked with making them aware. Is that in and of itself a bad thing?
It's the pesky Constitution and that pesky First Amendment!
"Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
Lobbyists are professionals who provide their fellow citizens with the necessary expertise to effectively petition their Government. And as professionals they charge a fee.
True but somewhere along the line this part of a Republic's functions has gone astray ...
"By conventions of representatives, freely, fairly, and proportionately chosen . . . "
Now we have many representatives at the highest level (and most likely other levels), bought and paid for by minority interests, albeit the wealthiest, in both parties or so it seems to me.
Functionally, it is more corporatism than anything else, however it has never been nor has it ever pretended to be a democracy.
<p style="color:rgb(70,62,62);margin-bottom:10px;">Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."</p>
<p style="color:rgb(70,62,62);margin-bottom:10px;">Lobbyists are professionals who provide their fellow citizens with the necessary expertise to effectively petition their Government. And as professionals they charge a fee.</p>
Wow, at first I missed the sarcasm. At least I hope you're being sarcastic. If not, I hope you're consistent in your thinking by saying that bribery is also a necessary part of the system and is nothing more than a "fee".
Wow, at first I missed the sarcasm. At least I hope you're being sarcastic. If not, I hope you're consistent in your thinking by saying that bribery is also a necessary part of the system and is nothing more than a "fee".
Bribery is an illegal act, hiring a professional to communicate your views to elected officials is not. Were those lobbyists to commit the crime of bribery, then their illegal acts should be punished of course. Were you to pay a plumber or a physician for their professional services do you consider that money a "bribe"? You shouldn't.
Quite the fail you've got going there.
Or are you under the mistaken impression people have to go through lobbyists to make vast and influencing campaign political contributions? Because they most certainly do not and ever since Citizens United it's far easier and more secret to go straight to the PAC route.
Bribery is an illegal act, hiring a professional to communicate your views to elected officials is not. Were those lobbyists to commit the crime of bribery, then their illegal acts should be punished of course. Were you to pay a plumber or a physician for their professional services do you consider that money a "bribe"? You shouldn't.
Quite the fail you've got going there.
Or are you under the mistaken impression people have to go through lobbyists to make vast and influencing campaign political contributions? Because they most certainly do not and ever since Citizens United it's far easier and more secret to go straight to the PAC route.
Thanks for clarifying. So influencing legislators by giving money through lobbyists is OK because they can also be influenced by giving through PACs?
What a wonder democracy is, when it's used correctly! It gives each of us equal access and equal influence over our elected representatives.
By the way, 'lobbying' is an essential part of the process. It was intended to be how we the people communicate with our elected representatives. It is not the fault of the concept that it is abused. It is those that accept some financial gain in return for the lobbying efforts that should be locked up first IMHO. That problems is not limited to the US, check out the UK's history. Little boys in backrooms is a form of payment and keeping it hushed up certainly is too. Looking at you Cyril Smith.
Only if it is allowed to be. Remove lobbying and how do a group of teachers from Iowa ask for some help? It is how we the people are supposed to get the attention of our elected officials. The difference is those teachers would not offer the elected official several million for his re election fund hidden in some super pac in return.
It is allowed. When Congress is not in session they are suppposed to go home and meet with their constituates. That is when they find out what we want. Ha!
It is allowed. When Congress is not in session they are suppposed to go home and meet with their constituates. That is when they find out what we want. Ha!
Exactly. How are we supposed to communicate with the "representatives" we put in office??? Uh, let's see ... E-mail, letters, phone calls, a visit to their office in DC or in their office where their constituents are . . . I hope no one really believes that lobbyists and PACs are the only mechanisms in place for making one's views known to a manner of congress!! Yikes!
Thanks for clarifying. So influencing legislators by giving money through lobbyists is OK because they can also be influenced by giving through PACs?
What a wonder democracy is, when it's used correctly! It gives each of us equal access and equal influence over our elected representatives.
Bribery is a illegal: period. Legal campaign contributions are just that, legal, whether organized by a lobbyist alongside their communication function or via other private citizens. And from my point of view since lobbyists have to register and submit records they're FAR superior to the various PACs, 501(c)(3) etc. groups with their shadow donations where there's no public record or accountability.
Comments
True but somewhere along the line this part of a Republic's functions has gone astray ...
"By conventions of representatives, freely, fairly, and proportionately chosen . . . "
Now we have many representatives at the highest level (and most likely other levels), bought and paid for by minority interests, albeit the wealthiest, in both parties or so it seems to me.
Absolutely right - it is legalized corruption.
It's a well worn meme for sure, and yes money buys power in the USA but just look around the rest of the planet. How many countries are run by those that attained power without substantial help, be that military, political or wealth.
True but somewhere along the line this part of a Republic's functions has gone astray ...
"By conventions of representatives, freely, fairly, and proportionately chosen . . . "
Now we have many representatives at the highest level (and most likely other levels), bought and paid for by minority interests, albeit the wealthiest, in both parties or so it seems to me.
When is everyone going to get out of this denial stage and acknowledge that this county is not about our constitution. It will always be trumped by money. Regardless of race, religion, political affiliation, economic status, gender or sexual orientation. In other words just about everyone is stuck in the money prison. You are beholden to someone in someway because you need money. You can live with out a constitution but not money. And so concludes my cynical rant of the day.
By the way, 'lobbying' is an essential part of the process. It was intended to be how we the people communicate with our elected representatives. It is not the fault of the concept that it is abused. It is those that accept some financial gain in return for the lobbying efforts that should be locked up first IMHO. That problems is not limited to the US, check out the UK's history. Little boys in backrooms is a form of payment and keeping it hushed up certainly is too. Looking at you Cyril Smith.
First, iCloud WAS NOT breached. Specific celebrity accounts were - those account holders used very poor judgement in setting up their passwords and were therefore hacked. Second, this did not happen in September, as it was not a single event. Various accounts had their passwords guessed over an extended period of time, and their content had been passed around over an extended period of time through various channels. This is a huge difference from iCloud being hacked. Please work on being more accurate in your reporting.
Hey I was the first to say 'Go for it Apple'
Agreed, idiocy in falling for phishing does not make a security breach. It would be like accusing a bank vault manufacturer of making a lousy safe because if you give your secretary the code her husband can rob it.
Only if it is allowed to be. Remove lobbying and how do a group of teachers from Iowa ask for some help? It is how we the people are supposed to get the attention of our elected officials. The difference is those teachers would not offer the elected official several million for his re election fund hidden in some super pac in return.
Absolutely right - it is legalized corruption.
It's the pesky Constitution and that pesky First Amendment!
"Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
Lobbyists are professionals who provide their fellow citizens with the necessary expertise to effectively petition their Government. And as professionals they charge a fee.
Functionally, it is more corporatism than anything else, however it has never been nor has it ever pretended to be a democracy.
Wow, at first I missed the sarcasm. At least I hope you're being sarcastic. If not, I hope you're consistent in your thinking by saying that bribery is also a necessary part of the system and is nothing more than a "fee".
Wow, at first I missed the sarcasm. At least I hope you're being sarcastic. If not, I hope you're consistent in your thinking by saying that bribery is also a necessary part of the system and is nothing more than a "fee".
Bribery is an illegal act, hiring a professional to communicate your views to elected officials is not. Were those lobbyists to commit the crime of bribery, then their illegal acts should be punished of course. Were you to pay a plumber or a physician for their professional services do you consider that money a "bribe"? You shouldn't.
Quite the fail you've got going there.
Or are you under the mistaken impression people have to go through lobbyists to make vast and influencing campaign political contributions? Because they most certainly do not and ever since Citizens United it's far easier and more secret to go straight to the PAC route.
Thanks for clarifying. So influencing legislators by giving money through lobbyists is OK because they can also be influenced by giving through PACs?
What a wonder democracy is, when it's used correctly! It gives each of us equal access and equal influence over our elected representatives.
Exactly. How are we supposed to communicate with the "representatives" we put in office??? Uh, let's see ... E-mail, letters, phone calls, a visit to their office in DC or in their office where their constituents are . . . I hope no one really believes that lobbyists and PACs are the only mechanisms in place for making one's views known to a manner of congress!! Yikes!
Thanks for clarifying. So influencing legislators by giving money through lobbyists is OK because they can also be influenced by giving through PACs?
What a wonder democracy is, when it's used correctly! It gives each of us equal access and equal influence over our elected representatives.
Bribery is a illegal: period. Legal campaign contributions are just that, legal, whether organized by a lobbyist alongside their communication function or via other private citizens. And from my point of view since lobbyists have to register and submit records they're FAR superior to the various PACs, 501(c)(3) etc. groups with their shadow donations where there's no public record or accountability.