Since they are now outsourcing most of the jobs to other countries and plan on more in the future, why don't we outsource them now, instead of later. We will get over it but they won't!
This is what you get when you get progressive people who are under the gun by the greedy who want billions for banks, stock houses, and oil companies, as well as the rich. Liberal progressives make lousy criminals as this proves. Because they are trying to be capitalists they fail at that too because that is not what they are. Why doesn't the rich right-wing Congressmen and Senators and their corporate benefactors just let em be and do their own thing, which is good for the country!
This was no sting operation in real sense as this video does show Ron Schiller uncompromised to fairness and balanced journalistic standard. In comparison to sting operation of Ian Murphy of BuffaloBeast.com interviewing Gov.Scott Walker of Wisconsin posing as Koch brother, the governor appeared to behave like a lap dog just as Republican Sen. Scott Brown. Our nation greatly needs campaign finance laws which may raise Judge Alito's eyebrow as done on the State of Union speech by President, but it will stop making these politicians from simply being lap dogs and instead fulfill their services to the State and our Nation
If there is one thing conservatives and liberals can agree on it is that the news is biased. They only differ on which networks they claim are guilty of the bias.
Given the above fact; why should tax dollars go to fund yet another voice that one or the other party will disagree with?
"To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves is sinful and tyrannical." - Thomas Jefferson
"There is no worse tyranny than to force a man to pay for what he does not want merely because you think it would be good for him." -- Robert A. Heinlein (1907-1988) American writer
Regarding Equal Rights Under the 1st Amendment
Campaign laws are sold to the public as necessary to level the playing field and prevent powerful, moneyed special interests, like corporations, from having undue influence. The problem is media corporations are moneyed, powerful, owned by special interests and dependent on the advertising dollars of other special interests. Is it any surprise corporate media is the biggest promoter of campaign laws and have succeeded in redefining the individual rights of freedom of assembly, press and speech as the unrestricted rights of corporate media.
Conservatives and liberals agree corporate media is biased and dispute which newspapers and broadcast networks are prejudiced. But both political persuasions purchase ads with the corporate media to promote candidates and issues. Hence editorials for or against candidates and issues, by the staffs of corporate media, must have political value.
So I ask Congressmen and Senators, why are corporate media exempt from campaign laws that regulate and restrict participation by individuals and groups? I do not believe Democrats or Republicans can defend that position.
I ask politicians to demonstrate they are serious about returning to a more limited and Constitutional government by passing the proposed legislation below.
This legislation costs nothing and leaves the Federal Election Campaign Act and the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act in place but defanged:
Rough Draft of Proposed Legislation
Whereas 2 U.S.C. 431 (9) (B) (i), commonly referred to as the "press exemption", exempts "legal persons" newspaper businesses, broadcast stations, magazine businesses and periodic publications from federal election finance laws which restrict the speech and press "Rights" of flesh and blood "Persons"; the citizens of these United States;
Federal Election Finance laws shall be revised to include the following definitions:
(1) Press - means any citizen of the United States that engages in any form of public communication.
(2) Media - means any citizen of the United States that engages in any form of public communication.
(3) Newspaper - means any form of printed material that includes any advertisement or other information for the purpose of public distribution, including information printed on paper, billboards, signs, fliers, web pages, and other electronic print material.
Why is it all of you think you can throw all conservatives and Republicans onto the Tea Party profile pile(which is only marginally applicable)? I am sure there are plenty of dumb and racist Democrats who are easily led. So don't go painting with such a wide and sloppy stroke, it may end up splattering back on you. Also not all filthy rich capitalists are Republicans!
You can't blame Socialism for despotism, it is an illogical and unrelated connection. I bet the sky was not as blue in those genocidal environments either.
I am a conservative. I am intelligent enough to know that broad sweeping generalizations are never true. There are stereotypical examples on both sides of the fence. I am a conservative because I want less government control over my life, because I don't need federal money to survive. And the article clearly states that Schiller had resigned prior to take another job - not that he was fired over his statements. And what is he doing talking to them anyway? It just wasn't smart. You represent a national news media, and you actually take the time to discuss your political opinions with two people claiming to be from the muslim brotherhood offering you 5 mill. That's just not very smart. I guess I need to get a life for even posting. But I just can't stand name calling from either side. The fact that anyone would say that a narrow stereotypical image describes an entire party is ridiculous.
But don't you use government money every day? Do you drive on the highways, do you have any children in school? Do you take advantage of cheap food due to government subsidy of corn? If Congress would allow the government to actually shut down, rather than selectively where it would not be felt, you would see how you use government money all the time. I understand what you say as you don't want a government hand out, or that you work honestly for your income, and that is admirable and absolute essential to the economy. But, my guess is that you and your family do partake in government money.
I have a great plan to end the Wisconsin problem. Outsource all of the teaching jobs to China. This would be a wonderful opportunity for children to learn a new language, and to have a unique outlook on world events and history. It could save Wisconsin's economy.
The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. By using this Web site you agree to accept our Terms of Service. Click here to read the Rules of Engagement.
Reply to Comment The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. By using this Web site you agree to accept our Terms of Service. Click here to read the Rules of Engagement.
Given the above fact; why should tax dollars go to fund yet another voice that one or the other party will disagree with?
"To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves is sinful and tyrannical." - Thomas Jefferson
"There is no worse tyranny than to force a man to pay for what he does not want merely because you think it would be good for him." -- Robert A. Heinlein (1907-1988) American writer
Regarding Equal Rights Under the 1st Amendment
Campaign laws are sold to the public as necessary to level the playing field and prevent powerful, moneyed special interests, like corporations, from having undue influence. The problem is media corporations are moneyed, powerful, owned by special interests and dependent on the advertising dollars of other special interests. Is it any surprise corporate media is the biggest promoter of campaign laws and have succeeded in redefining the individual rights of freedom of assembly, press and speech as the unrestricted rights of corporate media.
Conservatives and liberals agree corporate media is biased and dispute which newspapers and broadcast networks are prejudiced. But both political persuasions purchase ads with the corporate media to promote candidates and issues. Hence editorials for or against candidates and issues, by the staffs of corporate media, must have political value.
So I ask Congressmen and Senators, why are corporate media exempt from campaign laws that regulate and restrict participation by individuals and groups? I do not believe Democrats or Republicans can defend that position.
I ask politicians to demonstrate they are serious about returning to a more limited and Constitutional government by passing the proposed legislation below.
This legislation costs nothing and leaves the Federal Election Campaign Act and the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act in place but defanged:
Rough Draft of Proposed Legislation
Whereas 2 U.S.C. 431 (9) (B) (i), commonly referred to as the "press exemption", exempts "legal persons" newspaper businesses, broadcast stations, magazine businesses and periodic publications from federal election finance laws which restrict the speech and press "Rights" of flesh and blood "Persons"; the citizens of these United States;
Federal Election Finance laws shall be revised to include the following definitions:
(1) Press - means any citizen of the United States that engages in any form of public communication.
(2) Media - means any citizen of the United States that engages in any form of public communication.
(3) Newspaper - means any form of printed material that includes any advertisement or other information for the purpose of public distribution, including information printed on paper, billboards, signs, fliers, web pages, and other electronic print material.
I guess I need to get a life for even posting. But I just can't stand name calling from either side. The fact that anyone would say that a narrow stereotypical image describes an entire party is ridiculous.