i thought lobbying was a good thing?
remember when i said eliminate money from politics and cap campaign spending?
was your response..
but a few hours later it's
methinks it's contrarianism?
-
As of today ICMag has his own Discord server. In this Discord server you can chat, talk with eachother, listen to music, share stories and pictures...and much more. Join now and let's grow together! Join ICMag Discord here! More details in this thread here: here.
-
ICMag and The Vault are running a NEW contest in October! You can check it here. Prizes are seeds & forum premium access. Come join in!
Giveus Freedom, or give us death!
- Thread starter NiteTiger
- Start date
i thought lobbying was a good thing?
remember when i said eliminate money from politics and cap campaign spending?
was your response..
but a few hours later it's
methinks it's contrarianism?
Kids are not allowed at IC. Treating grownups like 3 year olds does the site no good. As little effort as you think a shark tank would take, it would take a bare fraction of that effort for you to go to the NRA, PETA, National Review, New Republic and cause grief there, leaving IC free to discuss weed in a polite and informative manner.
You can't demand your rules in your house, then deny ICs rules in ICs house. If you believe in free speech then you believe IC is the sole arbiter of what sees print at IC.
Mods don't have a ban button. Sucks to give false information....
To the rest, we would gladly do that but history has showed us that it flows over into the grow threads. Kids get mad and follow each other around the site giving neg rep and keeping arguments going that 99 percent of the people don't want to read.....
You don't seem very happy here........
I think it was closer to...
Lobbying is free speech. Lobbying costs money.
But we can work to reverse Citizens United, a ruling that says corporations are people and (unlimited) money is a form of corporate free-speech. We can work to wax 527s, the groups that spend unlimited amounts to trash opponents. These groups don't have to tell the truth because SCOTUS says it's not illegal to lie.
We can work to return campaign contributions to individual restrictions. The Kock brothers should be able to lobby Washington but they shouldn't be able to fund undisclosed associations that effectively finance lawmakers of choice. Warren Buffet and George Soros should have the same restrictions, even though their policy initiatives and political organizing are made public.
Getting religion out of politics, public schools etc is self explanatory but you'd have to be in the "freedom from religion" crowd to agree.
jj hits it on the nail......
L
longearedfriend
rabble rabble rabble!!!
personally id prefer to see zero "lobbying"(read buying)of lawmakers.
we have a lobby system it's called voting and direct contact.
you'll get no fight from me...
jeebus should get his one vote like santa and the easter bunny...
Lobbying is also representation and being represented. Bill Gates didn't grease palms when he lobbied restrictions accusing him of anti-trust violations. He didn't get what he wanted but he still had to pay for the costs to taxpayers.
Obviously, lawmakers don't always pass the best laws. IMO, it's nice to have representative outlets other than voting, so long as we have measures in place to mitigate abuse.
I
In~Plain~Site
I'm hoping you share the same sentiment for entitlements/budget spending.
Here's my opinion, I won't suggest it's the way.
We have to adjust. But I'm not for waxing programs, I'm for making them work. I think Herman Cain suggested something similar. I don't want to see Medicare evaporate so hopefully they'll find a compromise where numbers actually work. Then we'll have future lawmakers diverting funds and making crisis out of management debocles, affecting seniors and retirees. By the time I retire there may be no Medicare but I'd have to gamble anyway so i don't mind paying my FICA.
The way I understand it, SS is in much better shape. It will require some adjustment but IMO it's a necessary safety net for seniors and the disabled.
I just hope that while we're all giving in to these painful cuts, the top will get a rate adjustment and we can still fund Medicaid. Not that I have a soft heart for all the folks who can't afford health care. Of course I care about the less fortunate but no Medicare means higher insurance rates, co-pays and prescription drugs for me and my family. It's not just benevolence it's better economics.
These aren't apex solutions but we do risk huge economic troubles if we don't take the better of less than perfect scenarios.
We have to adjust. But I'm not for waxing programs, I'm for making them work. I think Herman Cain suggested something similar. I don't want to see Medicare evaporate so hopefully they'll find a compromise where numbers actually work. Then we'll have future lawmakers diverting funds and making crisis out of management debocles, affecting seniors and retirees. By the time I retire there may be no Medicare but I'd have to gamble anyway so i don't mind paying my FICA.
The way I understand it, SS is in much better shape. It will require some adjustment but IMO it's a necessary safety net for seniors and the disabled.
I just hope that while we're all giving in to these painful cuts, the top will get a rate adjustment and we can still fund Medicaid. Not that I have a soft heart for all the folks who can't afford health care. Of course I care about the less fortunate but no Medicare means higher insurance rates, co-pays and prescription drugs for me and my family. It's not just benevolence it's better economics.
These aren't apex solutions but we do risk huge economic troubles if we don't take the better of less than perfect scenarios.
Whoa, hold up a second. That's not what I said, nor what I meant.
I didn't demand anything, except of those who want something like that.
I want to talk about these things here on IC because it is a very unique community. So many different opinions and views, from all over the world. Unique perspectives that get lost, or are simply not present, on the other forums you mentioned.
I also never made the free speech bullshit argument, specifically because I do know this is IC's house, and they can do whatever they want.
I think I've had threads binned or posts modded by every mod here
I've bitched about it once, on one thread, and hey, that thread got re-opened, and is now a sticky.I'm not demanding any change to the TOU, or claiming they're unfair anywhere in my post. I was asking the users of IC to speak up for an isolated area where things could be discussed that aren't allowed in other areas.
I was demanding the users speak up in favor, or quit complaining about the TOU!
NiteTiger said:
Looking back, the tone of the post is angry, and the message unclear. To be honest, I put the post together very badly
But the anger is not at the mods, or even the TOU. This isn't anger because a thread got binned, this is anger that the users let this happen! We used to have absolutely incredible discussions here, and I'm angry that because of childish behavior, I can't have those any more.
Hell FB, you and I had this conversation ourselves. That's why I'm so surprised you took my post in that manner, you know me better than that
write a letter
make a phone call
stop by in person
go to a town hall
start a p.a.c. with unlimited donations and funnel that money straight to the candidate of your choice to buy legislation....
maybe a few rounds of golf in hawaii?
a roll with a 2k per hour underage male prostitute?
ohhh maybe the lobbyist your pac hires to pay to play could funnel some into little ricky's college fund?
fucking DB
get all money out of politics except the kind that spends...
ill stick with the old way...
I'm not talking about whacking your ding with your district rep.
V
vonforne
I
In~Plain~Site
Last edited:
