Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Ten Things the Democrats Can Do to Hold Corporations Accountable

By Charlie Cray and Phil Mattera, TomPaine.com. Posted December 22, 2006.


After years of lax congressional oversight, most Americans think corporations wield too much power. Only by restoring the balance between government and the private sector can corporate America regain the public's trust.
Advertisement

The midterm election demonstrated a deep dissatisfaction with the Bush administration's handling of the war and with the cornucopia of corruption that infected the Republican-controlled Congress. Yet it was more than a partisan victory for the Democrats. It also represented a popular backlash against business-friendly policies that have left many Americans behind.

The new Congress faces a staggering list of corporate abuses that have been ignored by lawmakers for years -- including executive pay levels that remain out of control, rampant contract fraud and war profiteering in Iraq and at home, widespread corporate tax avoidance, the offshoring of well-paying jobs, and the shredding of health, safety and environmental standards. It's enough to keep many congressional committees working overtime for years.

But the election must be seen as much more than a rejection of government of the Halliburtons, by the Enrons and for the Pfizers. It was also a sign that the myth of the good corporate citizen providing for broad prosperity has been punctured, providing an opportunity for deep change in the entire relationship between government and big business.

Some of the initial measures planned by Democrats, such as a minimum wage increase and a rollback of oil industry tax breaks, will begin to rectify the situation. But much more needs to be done. Twelve years ago, when the Republicans won control of Congress, they proposed a Contract with America. Now is the time for what might be called a Contract with Corporate America -- an effort to put limits on the power of big business.

What follows are a few clauses that Congress might include in such a contract. They come out of an ongoing conversation we've been having with leading corporate campaigners and policy experts poised to help Congress take a tough stance on business oversight and regulation.

Provide financial oversight

Business apologists want us to believe corporate fraud is a thing of the past, yet we continue to see business corruption in activities like the widespread backdating of stock options. Rather than tightening controls, the Bush administration and business groups have been seeking to relax the rules. Just last week, the Securities and Exchange Commission announced that companies would be given more flexibility in structuring their internal financial controls. The adjustment is touted as necessary to avoid excessive recordkeeping and auditing costs. Yet this limited relief will only encourage business to push for even more radical deregulation. Now is the time for stricter not weaker financial oversight.

Curb corporate crime

Also last week, the Justice Department announced it was putting new restrictions on the ability of federal prosecutors to use methods such as pressuring companies to waive the confidentiality of their legal communications -- a common technique in developing evidence against an executive suspected of fraud. The claim is that these changes restore "balance" to the process; in truth, Justice is caving in to demands from right-wing academics and former prosecutors who have moved to lucrative careers in the leading white-collar criminal defense firms. It should go without saying that Big Business has not earned the right to lax enforcement.

Restore regulatory integrity

Serious regulation -- on the environment, product safety, occupational safety and health, etc. -- is also being eviscerated as top positions at federal agencies have been filled with industry lobbyists who pass through the revolving door from the private sector and later return to the corporate world. Restoring reasonable oversight is possible only if those making regulatory policy are truly independent of the companies they are supposed to be regulating, which means tightening restrictions on the revolving door, encouraging the appointment of career public servants and providing strong protections for whistleblowers.

Address corporate concentration

Today more than half of the top 100 economies of the world are corporations. Mammoth companies dominate sectors such as energy, food processing and media. The consequences of this concentration are many. While a few start-ups strike it rich, the barriers to entrepreneurial success are formidable. In industries such as oil, a handful of major players can gouge consumers by colluding to keep prices high. In other cases, such as Wal-Mart's growing domination of retailing, prices are kept low, but workers and suppliers are squeezed. Media concentration has impoverished journalistic standards and threatened free speech.

At a minimum, antitrust enforcement must be reinvigorated and updated for the 21st-century economy. Congress could take the lead by creating a subcommittee tasked to investigate the extent of corporate consolidation and control, and the consequences for small businesses, consumers, communities, the culture and our democracy.


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: regulations, corporate america, congress

Philip Mattera heads the Corporate Research Project, an affiliate of Good Jobs First. Charlie Cray is director of the Center for Corporate Policy.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
OK, So Now Let's Focus On Enacting Method...
Posted by: MAT2 on Dec 22, 2006 2:14 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Yes, it seems like these are all good ideas but the problem has always been establishing the momentum behind each idea to get it enacted. The best way to get ideas enacted is to raise the voice of the people, en mass, to demand these changes.

Unfortunately, the masses of people in the U.S. are stuck in their complascent day to day indentured servitude to generating profit for the very corporate system that puts them further in debt. What we really need to focus on is waking up our fellow americans, getting them turned on by educating them regarding what corporate skulduggery is going on.

Once the masses are motivated then there needs to be an organized outlet for action which does not infringe on their time or pocket books too much. Perhaps it's time to support better businesses that contribute to such a movement, as it will take nothing less than a movement to alter the unsustainable course in which overzealous capitalism has overshadowed any goals of peaceful humane balance.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» SWEEKY WHEEL GETS THE OIL Posted by: Krain61
so many
Posted by: rsaxto on Dec 22, 2006 2:27 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The fact that so many reforms of corporate activity are needed is proof of the sad state of affairs that corporations have created to bamboozle and control government. When it is so easy to become a crook and not be prosecuted it is clear that we need new laws to control rampant corporate greed and criminality so we can have a decent democracy instead of a twisted one.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: so many Posted by: willymack
Yeah...They'll get right on that.
Posted by: kepstein7777 on Dec 22, 2006 3:10 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The check's in the mail...from the corporations, special interest groups, lobbyists...

Tell you what: As soon as the Democrats fix the corporate thing, we'll call you.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Correction on Previous Posting
Posted by: djnoll on Dec 22, 2006 4:27 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Linked Text is not working, so go to http://www.celdf.org if you want to learn more. I am not very computer literate, but I tried the link html provided and they only linked to the AlterNet homepage no matter how I placed the information within the html format. Sorry for any confusion.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

When you've seen one laundry list, you've seen them all.
Posted by: Sojourner on Dec 22, 2006 5:08 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I realize that there probably are more specific analyses in each of the areas mentioned, but to avoid citing them and to just pile generalization on top of generalization is about as useful as shouting "corporations are bums." We know that already.

What we need are specific recommendations that can be translated into legislation. Unless, that is, the author here is hired to write a political party platform. As with the latter, laundry lists are soon forgotten.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» my laundry list Posted by: Krain61
No Hearings Needed: Shut em Down!
Posted by: edith on Dec 22, 2006 5:51 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
the authors suggest congressional hearings on concentration. No such hearings are necessary. Public interest groups know where' there's concentration. The govt knows because of filings made with Justice, Energy and the FTC and FCC when biggies merge or acquire. Let's stop the hypocirisy.

I hate arbitrary govt limits because govt is the biggest and worst monopolist(e.g, DOD, the CIA and NSA). But in the real world, we need to a) keep major industries American and require that they hire American citizen workers at living wages and b) shut down any business that is the market dominant entry-antitrust lawyers and courts know what this mean.

Since Reagan, courts have allowed huge mergers as long as no specific harm was shown to competition, but competition is loosely defined and international congalomerates operate through deceptively "small" subsidiaries. The antitrust laws of TR and W.Wilson have been gutted. We need 21st century laws to make sure that near monopolies and vertically integrated monsters like Viacom, Disney or Verizon are per se illegal.

We know what the problem is; we need contemporary solutions that factor in gloablization and the elimination of labor rights as part of the New Monopolies.

PS

The Clinton Democrats are the biggest friends of Big Media so Hilary should be constantly bothered with questions about concentration. She will respond in vague generalizations and the response should be that she is a Media Whore. Yeah Use the word. She tries so hard to project a Puritan image to contrast with "Shake My Is" Bill.

Shock is the only means to cut through the iron grip these megacompanies have over us. They really are feudal fiefdoms and we have as few rights as serfs.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Good Luck With That
Posted by: JCR on Dec 22, 2006 7:03 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Given the fact that corporations are springing the Dems into office too, it should be an easy sell getting them to bite the hand that feeds them . . . .

What a joke! Hell will sooner freeze over!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The long struggle ahead.
Posted by: Slowburn on Dec 22, 2006 7:27 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The November elections was just the first return volley of a class war that the plutocrats believe they have already won. We must thank those few rationally dedicated watchdogs in our FBI for keeping a close eye on this last election (as an election volunteer I saw this for my self, and thought where were you in 2000, 02, 04) otherwise it would have been another stolen election. Accountability is the peoples best weapon against those that have every intention of selling our collective ass’s right out from under us.
The evidence ( Illegal immigrant slave labor, off shoring, tax dodging, outright contempt of environmental , and labor standards Etc.) suggests that for the most part they already have with the NAFTA’s CAFTA’s and all the other SHAFTA’s now on the books. To believe that these agreements are nothing less than a signing away of our sovereignty as a people the right to govern ourselves is clearly a mass psychosis of illogical group think (The free trade illusion). The world corporate machine will not willingly give the people back their sovereignty the investment in their eyes must be protected at any cost. Remember free trade has become the code word for global domination.
As it stands the world corporate machine has controlled our government for the last decade (including the hijacking and brain washing of the faithful) right up to the last election . We as a people must first take back our government and then hold that government accountable.
Any oversight at all would go a long way in giving people faith in their government again. But you better believe that the plutocratic multinationals aren’t going to take this lying down, you can put your head on your pillow tonight believing that they will have nothing less than a retention of world domination. We my not be able to control what they do to people in other lands but we can and must stand up for ourselves here in our own land. They have amassed more wealth in the last decade than at any other time in the history of mankind to believe they will not use that wealth against those that oppose them is gravely naive.
You must fight your way up when they have you on your knees.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

We can't depend on Democrats
Posted by: Lincoln fan on Dec 22, 2006 7:30 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
For too long, the federal government has been acting as a virtual captive of big business interests.

This isn't an act it's a fact; it's not virtual it's real. Both parties are controlled by the corporatocracy. To control big business the people must take control of both parties. It can be done before 2008. Join the Lincoln Initiative. It costs nothing but a minimum effort at your convenience.
Bob Reichenbach
Director, The Lincoln Initiative.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The problems are fundamental and systemic in our corporate culture and economy
Posted by: disenfranchised on Dec 22, 2006 8:20 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
1. The corporation is a creation of government – a special entity that isolates owners from liabilities incurred by their business. This creates a clearly special class of persons, hidden behind artificial statutory protection. Excellent for developing an economy, but open for the abuses of the greedy.

2. The only “moral” control that is allowed in this statute-created special corporate class is that which is imposed by additional statutes. Corporate leadership is required to operate on the limits of what is legal to be competitive and fulfill their fiduciary responsibilities.

3. Corporations need to be regulated to:
a. protect them from the excesses of their own greedy leadership (Enronesque)
b. prevent abuses within the marketplace
c. insure competition on the basis of product innovation and delivery
d. limit access to the peoples representative government to on-invitation or through specific public petition, similar to civil court access

4. Corporations should be required to contribute to the common good of the populations they market to and from which they extract their profits. Owners (stockholders) have limited responsibility for a corporation’s actions. It cannot exceed the value of their stock. A sole-proprietor or partnership business failure can cost the owners everything they own, home and savings included, but shareholders are protected from corporate failure. Less risk, stock is a good investment, but breeds a class separation like we have now. It is not wrong to use the corporate economic engine in furtherance of the common good. In fact, it is irresponsible not to regulate this artificial class of business for the benefit of both shareholders and the people whose government gives them their protection from liability.

5. The corporate economy should finance the common good and promote economic health: (at a minimum - all directly benefit the corporations themselves)
a. universal health care
b. universal child care and lifetime education
c. basic research outside of product development
d. national defense

Key to such a system is the removal of corporate special interest groups from their position of dominance in our government. From there, careful steerage would be required to transform to a more humane culture.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Parents could help Posted by: Krain61
No thanks to most of the above...
Posted by: ABetterFuture on Dec 22, 2006 9:05 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...of which the basis for these "calls to action" are largely fantastical.

With the exception of, "We need stricter controls on corporate contributions and lobbying expenditures in order to restore integrity to public policymaking, while public funding of campaigns is long overdue as a means of opening the election process to those not beholden to moneyed interests." I found the article completely lacking in rational substance, practical reforms that preserve our ability to thrive economically, and any genuinely well-reasoned argument for implementing these (mostly) destructive measures.

Even so, I can appreciate the fact that the puppy-dog eyed politicians of the parties of Money and Power are always looking for a handout, and the article does a decent job at (tersely) pointing out the problem with campaign contributions, namely that these practices subvert the democratic process. The author fails to fully address the problem, however--we need end the practice of lobbying in D.C. We do not send our legislators there to accept gifts. We send our legislators there to do the work of the Republic. Our legislators should spend more time in their home states with their constituency, and if lobbying groups (that means ANY lobby) wants an audience with a senator or congressman, that party should visit them in their home district/state.

Such a measure would avoid running afoul of the constitutional requirements for equal treatment under the law and our long held ideal that we don't get into the business of enacting taxes without giving the taxed representation, to include people who engage in business and commerce.

In sum, the best part of this article was highlighting the continued problem with campaign contributions and lobbying (though the problem is far broader than just the corporate influence). The rest? Meh; not so much.

We should strive for the best Republic we can build, not the best Democracy money can buy.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Heh
Posted by: davcrock on Dec 22, 2006 9:29 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
While I normally would argue for and against some of your points, I realize it's not worth it anymore. Most of Alternet's readership are so busy waiting for a pure socialist Utopia that will never come, that they won't dare dirty themselves with worrying about incremental change to the business environment.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

balance sheet
Posted by: cinattra on Dec 22, 2006 9:32 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Publicly traded corporations definitely need more transparency in how they operate especially on the balance sheet. I don't care how much they pay their CEOs as long as all their costs/gains are on the balance sheet so I can make an informed stock buy/sell.

We definitely need some campaign finance reform but as far as the particulars I'm not too sure. I don't think it is necessarily a bad idea that corporations can give money as long as those donations are made public (and are included on the balance sheet).

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: balance sheet Posted by: Lincoln fan
» RE: balance sheet Posted by: grrrampop
Two Key Solutions to Solving the Problem of Corporate Power
Posted by: Earthian on Dec 22, 2006 11:57 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The article neglects to describe two key solutions.

One consists of the 28 words that would guide a federal charter for all corporations that engage in US interstate commerce:

"The pursuit of profits must not come at the expense of the environment, human rights, public health and safety, the dignity of employees or the welfare of communities."

(See this link: http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0726-11.htm)

Secondly, Ralph Nader proposed a key solution in the early 1990s, again, as part of a new federal charter for corporations:

Require a high percentage (say 30 to 50 percent) of board members from each corporation be elected from the employees.

In Germany they have had this since the 1960s and it is called "economic co-determination." There is a large literature on the subject.

These two things are simple, easy to legislate, and most Americans would support them from union leaders to regular working people. And they (and similar proposals) have been part of the progressive platform via the Green Party, Charles Derber's writings, Dennis Kucinich's issues, and Ralph Nader's platform for a long time. And most importantly: they would have a profound and positive effect to address the current ills of the shareholder-only, corporate-conservative regime controlling and ruining our nation and destroying our world.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Top Ten Ways to Change the World in 2007
Posted by: rwa on Dec 22, 2006 12:33 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
1. Wear a “Free Tibet” t-shirt
2. Use recycled toilet paper
3. Watch Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert
4. Adopt a Third World orphan
5. Start a discussion about Africa
6. Eat free range chicken
7. Drive a hybrid SUV
8. Subscribe to The Nation
9. Chant for peace in your yoga class
10. Vote Democrat

Did I forget anything?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Abolish All Corporations
Posted by: edhowes on Dec 22, 2006 12:34 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
1. Abolish the incorporation fraud entirely. People are behaving as though state governments do not even exist and national government fills that void in our heads. State governments approve corporate charters. State governments derive their just powers from the people. I am a person with no power to limit my own liabilities, by signing a piece of paper and having someone else sign it to make it official. Since I do not have any power to limit anyone's liability, I cannot grant this power to any government agency. Therefore no state has the authority or power to limit the liabilities of any person or group. Incorporation is a fraud and has been so from the beginning.

2. Demand people's courts in every state and sue business executives, directors and shareholders jointly, driving the worst offenders out of business whenever possible. Any business which does not comply with the rulings of the people's courts is to be boycotted by all citizens of that state and added to a non compliance list circulated to the people of all other states, where they may also be sued.

3. Form local militias with appropriate technology to defend against the corporate military which will try to put the nation under martial law the minute we have courts which no longer honor the corporate fraud.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Abolish All Corporations Posted by: Krain61
Corporations aren't the Enemy. 'Corporate Personhood' is.
Posted by: eddie torres on Dec 22, 2006 2:15 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Good cover-your-ass move, America: "Oh, we're so sorry about all the global chaos we've caused! Our friends in the DNC are going to fix those corporate bastards once and for all."

Michael Moore's movies show just how hard Nancy Pelosi is going to work on corporate reform. 'Corporate personhood' is the real culprit and the DNC just isn't bright enough to tackle it. See journalists/authors like Joshua Holland (AlterNet), Thom Hartmann (thomhartmann.com and commondreams.org), Tim Harford (Financial Times), George Monbiot (UK Guardian), Myron Levin and Alan Miller (LA Times) for more on the subject.

Tackling 'corporate personhood' can only take place AFTER money and politics are disentangled: public financed elections, impartial district boundaries, national holiday for federal elections, 1305 Reps instead of 435, end of the electoral college, etc. And there's a lot more momentum for that in the US public eye after the latest Florida and Ohio shenanigans.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Four things Posted by: eddie torres
» And Posted by: eddie torres
The seeds of corporate fascism have been sown
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Dec 22, 2006 2:32 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's interesting to look at the history of totalitarian governments, whether they are of the traditional monarchist form, or of tthe more recent fascist and communist types.

They all have certain things in common - they begin with total control of the academic-educational and media-informational systems. In the US, that began with the passage of the Bayh-Dole act and follow-ups in the early 80's under Reagan (the result being corporate control of public universities, both the research and the adminsitration); it was continued by Clinton when he signed the 1996 Telecommunications Act (i.e the Media Consolidation Act). The corporate media then got public opinion behind Bush's Iraq invasion.

Compare this to IG Farben, Standard Oil, Walter Teagle, and the 1930's fascism that American industrialists admired and financed before, during and after World War II.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

we need a two party system
Posted by: wleming on Dec 22, 2006 4:23 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Democrats and Republicans have"political" differences -
- but don't disagree about Corporate Capitalism.
Is it really possible that anyone thinks Democrats want to modify Corporate power? The record proves, again and again, that
Democrats will do anything they can to promote Corporate
capital-. Ask Ralph Nader. We really do need a Second Party.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Laws on Incorporation Need Reform First
Posted by: gtash on Dec 22, 2006 4:34 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As Thom Hartman points out in his books, corporate "personhood" (as enshrined in the minds of lawyers) is a fiction which should be addressed directly. Corporations are not now the same as people and never have been ruled so, and are not thus endowed with equivalent rights to living, breathing human beings. So if you want to do anything to make corporations accountable, start with the basics. Make the law clear that corporations are not the same as persons under law and are not accorded identical rights.

The next thing is to prevent corporations from being able to have multiple birthplaces, aliases, and differential tax liabilities. People don't grow by cancer. Neither should corporations.

And finally, prevent or limit the interlocking corporate board representation. Boards of Directors are cross-bred and can not represent the interests of a single corporation at a time.

The rest of what the author suggests might have some change of working if these three things were structured. Until then, you will make no significant impact.

If you had the power to live forever when the mortals around are destined to die natural deaths, wouldn't you behave differently? Wouldn't you assume you had less in common? Wouldn't your interests and energies be spent altogether differently? Wouldn't you begin to discount all the things we mortals hold dear?

Of course you would. And that is source of the problem.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Government and corperations same thing.
Posted by: Slonezy on Dec 23, 2006 7:21 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Most authors seem to think that Government and big corporations are two different entitys. But at the present they are the same thing. they work together to acomplish there Ends. We the people are the Government, but we have bought the line of corporate america that we need them to run our lives when in reality they need us to survive. We could have a nonviolent revolution in the USA just by refusing to buy anything that we didn't need for one month. This would quickly show them who is boss. BUT who is to lead us. and what month should our revolution start? These kind of questions keep us captives.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» who is to lead us. Posted by: Lincoln fan
PATSIES @ the VAMPIRE STATE
Posted by: Hal on Dec 23, 2006 8:32 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
“Push transparency and democracy”?

“Restore integrity to the legislative process”?


Who do these limited hangout pretenders kid?

A stooge “government” from Washington to 10 Downing with its lapdog MSM between is a complete farce. And it’s officially been so from the dead of winter 1913 when the “Federal Reserve” Corporation (never federal and without reserves but for a snake oil extortion racket) was foisted onto the nation to be put in charge of the global economy and thus the brothel-circus at Washington.

Private power to force-feed worthless counterfeit money to the world in exchange for real working debt loads makes trade slaves of Americans with most of the earth’s peoples.

Parasite cartel oligarchs that run the “Federal Reserve” Corporation own the sham government at Washington the way a mob pimp owns his pet whore.

ONE MORE TIME:

In effect – the system is a CORPORATE CARTEL PSYOPS STATE (Psyops for Orwellian psychological command and control thru MSM to “education”). This is a corporate crime regime that makes a lethal mockery of free market democracy and capitalism worldwide.

Put another way, this de facto oligarch cartel rule is a VAMPIRE STATE in form and function.

Big Oil, Big Pharma, Big Banking, MSM and all the rest are downstream corrupted shadows of a giant cartel elephant no one at poodle DC or its MSM propaganda show will talk about. Ditto for bogus “war on terror” “globalization” and a thousand cons built to extort the gullible at public cost for private greed.

Virtually all the planet’s horrors come out of this core cancer that makes war and strife at the alter of profit in trade for human life.

Those that go with the system at face value remain patsies or self-serve sellouts.

There is a 3rd option…

‘THIS [FEDERAL RESERVE] ACT ESTABLISHES THE MOST GIGANTIC TRUST [PRIVATE MONOPOLY] ON EARTH. WHEN THE PRESIDENT [WILSON] SIGNS THIS BILL, THE INVISIBLE GOVERNMENT OF THE MONEY POWER WILL BE LEGALIZED… THE WORST LEGISLATIVE CRIME OF THE AGES IS PERPETRATED BY THIS BANKING AND CURRENCY BILL.”
CONGRESSMAN CHARLES A. LINDBERG SR. (speaking to Congress in opposition to the global banking cartel and its privately owned “Federal Reserve” Corporation. December 23rd, 1913)

“I HAVE UNWITTINGLY RUINED MY COUNTRY…WE HAVE COME TO BE ONE OF THE WORST RULED, ONE OF THE MOST COMPLETLEY CONTROLLED AND DOMINATED GOVERNMENTS IN THE WORLD… A GOVERNMENT BY THE OPINION AND DURESS OF A SMALL GROUP OF DOMINANT MEN.”
PRESIDENT WOODROW WILSON (three years after signing a “Federal Reserve Act” and its privately owned “credit system” into law. Quote 1916)

"THE REAL TRUTH OF THE MATTER IS, AS YOU AND I KNOW, THAT A FINANCIAL ELEMENT IN THE LARGER CENTERS HAS OWNED THE GOVERNMENT EVER SINCE THE DAYS OF ANDREW JACKSON.”
PRESIDENT FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELT (describing oligarch rule in a letter to handler “Colonel” Edward M. House, confidence man for the cartel and founder of the Council on Foreign Relations. House also handled President Wilson in the foisting of a private and unconstitutional “Federal Reserve” Corporation and its IRS in 1913. FDR speaks of monopolists at cartel centers of New York & London that own the U.S. Government. November 21st, l933)

Freedom to Fascism

Griffin on the Federal Reserve Con 1

Griffin on the Federal Reserve Con 2

Federal Reserve by E. Mullins

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Holding "corporations" Accountable
Posted by: pfm on Dec 26, 2006 9:11 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Until "we" are collectively willing to finance elections without the need for corporate funding or PAC funding "we" will continue to elect politicians of all color and stripes who are beholding to their master$ - corporate funding - "we" get the government we are willing to pay for.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

My #1 Question to Corporations
Posted by: fahma on Dec 28, 2006 3:46 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
My #1 Question to Corporations that don't operate ethically:

How long can you keep growing profits when, each year, a larger percentage of American citizens can't afford the products you make?

The old parable about the golden goose seems to fit here, doesn't it? Or is it the one about milking the cow (us) until it's dry?

Just asking.

Bill Darbyshire
Galien, MI 49113
fahma@qtm.net

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

One more thing...
Posted by: magistre on Dec 29, 2006 5:43 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
And I see this being enacted as "swiftly" as I see all the other ideas being enacted: (1) Recognize "Lobbying" (above a breif slide show) for what it is, BRIBERY. Make it a capital crime. (2) Enact a national "local content" law. If you want to sell it in the U.S. 3/4 of it should be made here.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Democrates will do nothing.
Posted by: Krain61 on Jan 1, 2007 1:20 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So many of Americans are just trying to make it from pay to pay {because our wages have been bid down thanks to cheap labor}to even know or care what's going on.The media is run by the corporations and there not going to tell you how they have you bent over hosing you. They{goverment} made a law that would increase your minumin payment on credit cards! Why are they regulating what we pay when there not rugulating the sharks who charge these high rates.Why are we selling drugs on TV that help people get there thing to stand up..They keep shoving these drugs at people and like has been said before "Americans are dumb""They'll buy anything"Public TV is the only one channel that comes close to telling the truth.Fox news says they report and you decide!Well dammit tell us the truth Fox.
Any one who thinks the Democrates will do anything that will restore our Rights and bring jobs back home is INSANE.
They'll hang a carrot out there and bob it around and say we can't get anything done because we didn't have enough votes..And many a times it's because one of them didn't show up to vote..Probably because they was out with there lobbiest.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]