Did you see Supreme Court Justice Alito quietly call Obama a liar during speech?

[Nick Gromicko]

It happened during the State of the Union Speech. When Obama was slammin' the Supreme Court while they had to sit and politely take this attack across government branch lines, Alito mouthed "Not true."

Deja Vu.

[rbusch]

HERE IS THE VIDEO

http://www.politico.com/singletitlev...id=63741274001

[James H. Bushart]

Originally Posted by gromicko

It happened during the State of the Union Speech. When Obama was slammin' the Supreme Court while they had to sit and politely take this attack across government branch lines, Alito mouthed "Not true."

Deja Vu.

I agree with the President.

International corporations have no business financing elections.

The Supreme Court does not rule on the "right or wrong" of an issue, but whether or not a ban is constitutional. Apparently, a ban is not constitutional. Accordingly, an amendment is in order.

I am reminded of how ITT (International Telephone and Telegraph, Inc., at the time) during World War II had U.S. contracts to build aircraft navigation equipment and had German contracts to build anti-aircraft weapons that were used to shoot down the U.S. planes using their navigation equipment. Corporations have no allegiance to any one particular government....only their international stockholders. Bin Laden has many of his millions invested in Wall Street. They should not be financing elections, IMO.

[Nick Gromicko]

So InterNACHI, a corporation, funded in part by dues from members outside the U.S., should not be permitted to fund the maintenance of a message board that permits its committee members to speak out against appointed licensing board chairs or the U.S. elected governors that appointed them?

[James H. Bushart]

Originally Posted by gromicko

So InterNACHI, a corporation, funded in part by Canadian member's dues, should not be permitted to fund the maintenance of a message board that permits its committee members to speak out against appointed licensing board chairs or the U.S. elected governors that appointed them?

Far different from financing elections, wouldn't you say?

But consider how ASHI has used its members' money to push for licensing laws very early in the game before people actively fought such proposals. Look at the corrupt manner in which corporations, such as EBPHI uses funds to get laws passed that enriches it through the use of a test that does nothing to assure the quality of a home inspection.

If you do get into the mode of providing financial backing for such matters, I hope you will keep the Missouri fight in mind.

[John McKenna]

Good for Alito.

[Nick Gromicko]

Good for Alito.

Good for Alito? Heck, it was GREAT for Rep Joe Wilson!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qgce06Yw2ro

I wonder who will call Obama a liar during his next speech to Congress?

[Bob Elliott]

It is good to hear the President took a stand against 12 that answer to no one.

[Nick Gromicko]

I hear ya, but it was the wrong venue.

[Stephen W. Stanczyk]

Originally Posted by gromicko

So InterNACHI, a corporation, funded in part by dues from members outside the U.S., should not be permitted to fund the maintenance of a message board that permits its committee members to speak out against appointed licensing board chairs or the U.S. elected governors that appointed them?

Not what he is saying. He is saying foreign owned corporations are now being allowed to fund any and all campaigns and that should not happen.

I find it amazing that those that have railed for years against activist judges would not complain about this ruling. First amendment rights for corporations? Please. There is nothing that stops the Chairman of a Board to speak all he wants. Nothing that stops members of the corporation from speaking all they want. This was not a matter of free speech, but a way to allow purchased speech.

When the founding fathers wrote the Constitution, they were trying to free themselves from foreign rule and foreign businesses especially the like of the East India Trading Company. (remember the boston tea party?) That has now been thrown out the window. Foreign corporations will now be buying our election process.

It takes $20 million to win a Senate election. That's only a billion to replace the Senate over 6 years. Think B of A or Morgan Stanley or GoldmanSachs don't think that is a steal? To be able to rewrite the laws in their favor? This ruling gave corporations the opportunity to purchase elections and run the government. Contrary to everything the founding fathers stood for. Sad, very sad.

[Nick Gromicko]

Name a corporation, big enough to influence an election, that has no foreign stockholders.

[Bob Elliott]

That is why we need a change.

There should be limits on amount spent $$$and certain amounts of air time given by communication companies.

Only the ultra rich can win.
Lobby groups run the government.

[Nick Gromicko]

Did U.S. stockholders of U.S. corps not end apartheid in SA?

[Stephen W. Stanczyk]

Originally Posted by gromicko

Name a corporation, big enough to influence an election, that has no foreign stockholders.

Not talking foreign stockholders. Foreign corporations. Like Barclays bank. or how about Toyota, British Petroleum, Mitsubishi.... the list goes on and on.

[Nick Gromicko]

What makes a corporation a

Foreign corporation

?

Its country of incorporation?