Don’t let Nancy Pelosi’s vag destroy beautiful unions like this!
A Corporate American, National Review:
Keep the First Amendment
- Corporations are too people. If you cut them, do they not bleed? Oh… right, um… SMOKESCREEN! Clever escape!
Today’s outing is a particularly special treat. A National Review article that no one wanted to put their name to. Think about that for a second. The National Review regularly pushes out articles proudly claimed by their authors on the topics of how one’s word processing software kicked their ass in an argument. Not to mention the unending stream of J-Load posts that are just asking the readers to write his next post for him.
But this outing? Nope, no one wanted to touch it with a ten-foot pole.
And honestly, it’s not hard to see why. It’s pretty obviously just a mandate sent on down from the Koch Brothers worrying that the century and a half gravy train that has been “corporate personhood” may slowly be being stopped by Denzel Washington and Chris Pine acting in a terrible movie.
And despite trying its darndest, it still can’t escape the basic problem that whenever you try and claim that amorphous megacorporations are people, it just comes off sounding dumb as fuck. In fact so much that I’m surprised more comedies and satires haven’t run with it as a concept (I mean, imagine Taco Bell walking down the altar, the jokes write themselves).
But I’m getting ahead of myself, let’s let them start the train wreck of fail themselves:
The phrase “stunning development” is used far too often in our politics, but here is an item that can be described in no other way: Nancy Pelosi and congressional Democrats, frustrated by the fact that the Bill of Rights interferes with their desire to muzzle their political opponents, have proposed to repeal the First Amendment.
Holy shit balls Batman! Complete 100% repeal of the First Amendment?!? That’s like Nick Cage crazy, peoples, and the liberal media is like totes covering it up even though their entire livelihood is at stake…
Course, they haven’t really done anything about the various slow rollbacks of the first amendment that have happened over the decades, severely limiting when and where we can exercise rights like the freedom of assembly, and…
I suddenly forgot my point.
That is precisely what the so-called People’s Rights Amendment would do.
People’s Rights Amendment? I think I was reading something about that not long ag-
If this amendment were to be enacted, the cardinal rights protected by the First Amendment — free speech, freedom of the press, freedom of assembly, freedom to petition the government for redress of grievances — would be redefined and reduced to the point of unrecognizability.
Internet Slang for “Oh my God” peoples, this is like the Founding Fathers being anally violated by Space Yetis! SPACE YETIS, people!
I mean, I’m sure this isn’t just overblown and desperate hyperbole designed to short-circuit my critical analysis. You know, like all those Churches who rant about how not letting them violate the First Amendment is the worst violation of the First Amendment the world has ever known, because it’s being violated by Satan Cock?
The amendment would hold that the rights protected by the Constitution are enjoyed only by individuals acting individually; individuals acting in collaboration with others would be stripped of those rights.
Wait… weren’t we just talking about how the First Amendment was being repealed entirely? So, now, our individual rights are secure, but it’s just our rights as organizations?
Let me just check what the People’s Right Amendment is, unless you have something really fucking compelling.
The Supreme Court and U.S. law have long held that Americans do not surrender the rights they enjoy individually when they act in association with one another. This has been a fundamental feature of U.S. law since the very beginning, and even before that, inasmuch as the notion that collective action does not deprive us of our rights goes back into the Common Law as well. U.S. court cases going back to the 18th century recognize that fact, as does federal statute: 1 U.S.C. §1 reads in part: “the words ‘person’ and ‘whoever’ include corporations, companies, associations, firms, partnerships, societies, and joint stock companies, as well as individuals.”
Well that’s extremely…
(New tab, google search)
Shock and consternation! It turns out that the offending anal rapist of the constitution is just a new proposed amendment (which will unfortunately probably never be passed) removing the personhood from corporations, because you know, they aren’t. At all. And the exploitation of that Supreme Court temper tantrum over the North giving former slaves personhood is getting to the point of potentially ending even the pretense of democracy in America.
And Mecha-Globo-Super-Robot Surprise! It turns out the corporate whores at the National Review are doing their best to try and spin that as Satan’s Dong penetrating the Ur-Freedom in case it actually does get traction and corporations have to go back to buying elections the old-fashioned way.
Strange things give the Left the heebie-jeebies, and “corporate personhood” seems like a strange thing.
1. Yes, “strange things” give the Left the heebie-jeebies. As strongly demonstrated by the Left’s slow acceptance of gay people, trans people, different racial and ethnic cultures, multicultural food experiences, artistic experimentation, etc… while the Right has been all over it. I mean, I know IT’S ALWAYS PROJECTION, but can you disguise it a LITTLE bit for us?!?
Yes. A thousand times yes. Corporate personhood is a “strange thing” by which I mean it is by itself satire. Imagine a corporation doing anything a person would do. Fall in love, eat an ice cream, watch a movie, fuck someone’s mother. You can’t. And most of us can pretty much imagine some pretty messed up stuff doing all those things. Robots, Zombies, Unicorns, Lovecraftian horrors. But corporations aren’t people. They aren’t even remotely people.
And frankly, that was kind of the point when the Supreme Court made them people back in the 19th century. It was the most ludicrous group they could think to grant personhood in protest of the “unthinkable” granting of personhood to what was in their mind property.
But “corporate personhood” is simply the notion that incorporated groups — businesses, political parties, unions, nonprofits, etc. — are single entities under the law.
That would be called incorporation, i.e. BEING A CORPORATION.
Corporate personhood is the notion that said incorporated groups are not only single entities, but single people.
That Bil is a person. And Ted is a person. And if Bill and Ted form Bill and Ted’s Excellent Corporation, then that corporation becomes a third human being with the additional rights a person is granted by society.
And that tends to be a problem when Bill and Ted’s Excellent Corporation kills a person and Bill and Ted claim no responsibility, because it’s on the corporation not them. There’s no way to do anything meaningful to said corporation and if you “kill it” then it’ll just be replaced the next day with Bill and Ted’s Bogus Corporation with the same basic structure.
And its even more problematic when Bill and Ted’s Excellent/Bogus Corporation wants the additional rights given individual people despite having no way to be held liable to the same responsibilities.
But then, you already know that, you’re just hoping the mouth breathers that read the National Review will just assume that the very notion of corporations are under attack so they’ll continue to vote for themselves to be ground into meat-byproducts for Bill and Ted’s Excellent Soylent Green Corporation.
One would think that the Left would find this convenient: If Monsanto is not a “person” under the law, it cannot be regulated, taxed, sued, or fined, because for the purposes of the law it does not exist.
Um, no, because it’d still be a “corporate entity”, which would be subject to regulations and taxations as part of its fucking corporate charter. All it would lose is the air of protection that being a potentially immortal shape-shifting person immune to most forms of legal reprisal give it.
And now that I think about it, a Corporation would make a great late-level encounter in a D&D campaign. (I swing my sword at it. Great, it misses as the Corporation doesn’t really exist as an entity. Bogus, but at least it doesn’t get to attack. …I didn’t say that.)
Without the ability to treat enterprises as a single legal entity, there would be no redress for damages caused by a defective GM vehicle except to file claims against each individual owner of the 1.57 billion shares of GM stock outstanding.
I know this is supposed to be a poor attempt at snark and a complete fail at understanding how corporate charters work, but I can’t stop fantasizing about a world where it worked like that.
The major stockholders or owners of a corporation being personally liable for all the murderous/disastrous “cost-cutting” schemes they pass entirely because they expect not to be holding the bag when or if the check comes due? And an end to offensively low fines that ignore how much corporations make from those exact “calculated risks”?
Maybe even jail time for the particularly criminal enterprises like car designs that kill people or the Gulf Oil Spill?
Can you imagine how great a society that would be?
Fuck you’d only have to do it to the people who owned over a thousand shares and the effects would be so overwhelmingly positive I’m getting wet just thinking about it.
Why must wingnuts tantalize us so with their ideas of nightmare scenarios?
But if GM and Monsanto can be sued, then they can defend themselves from suits. If they can be taxed on their property, then they can own property. If they have liabilities under contracts, then they have rights under contracts, too. If they have liabilities under the law, then they have rights under the law.
Yes, this is all outlined in the corporate charter. In what a corporation is. They don’t need to be physically, legally human beings to do all that. I mean, contract law is largely based on that. Taking complex negotiations between what are in essence, large groups of people and translating it into something more basic and legally sound.
And it’s particularly offensive to have the Koch Bros. robot who wrote this to whine about rights and liabilities when the main reason that the PRA is getting traction is the major abuse of the “rights” of corporations by corporations who know they will never be held to heel on the supposed “liabilities” because they can’t be reasonably applied to something that is in the end not a human being.
Especially since they are so often used by 1 or 2 actual human beings to give their own rights a super boost that no one else could ever hope to match.
But then, some pigs being more equal than others has kinda always been the point for our Aristocratic Democracy-hating Overlords.
On that note, man have they been stepping up their attempts to essentially refight the American Revolution. No, we should have a King and an Aristocracy dictating all the policy, rather than letting the rabble decide.
I’m not sure that’s going to work any better for them the second time around.
Also, IT’S ALWAYS PROJECTION, Founding Fathers Edition.
But the Occupy Left and the Democrats who sympathize with those ignorant misfits resent the fact that some business enterprises oppose their political agenda and support their opponents.
Yes, liberals are just motivated by a desire to undermine their opponents and not at all worried about some rich fucker’s personal corporation being able to single-handedly finance a candidate’s campaign or something having all the rights of a human without anyway to throw them in jail if they decide to fuck us to death for shits and giggles.
I know, it’s always IT’S ALWAYS PROJECTION day on the right, but yeah, not all of us are dicks like you.
Some of us can have principles without checking to make sure a corporation’s dick is up their ass first.
(And some don’t: Wall Street gave generously to the Democratic party, and to Barack Obama particularly, in the 2008 election cycle.)
Democrats are just as bad false equivalence. Take a shot!
The Left controls the unions, the government bureaucracies, most of the media, and the educational establishments
And one day, believing this is true will MAKE it true! You just need to believe harder. Remember if you make it happen by continuing to demonize said groups and threatening to destroy them, it still counts!
but its dreams of taxation and regulation do not sit particularly well with many who have to pay those taxes and suffer the regulation.
Yes, and said individuals can use their single individual rights to vote, argue on their own behalf, peacefully assemble, and so on to convince other individual voters to vote alongside them.
Even by your weak ass sauce, those said rights are still intact. You’re just sad because you can’t tip the scale when it’s just 3 whiny fuckers taking home the bank and feeling mopey that they have to give some back so everyone else can still get enough to FUCKING EAT.
Allow me to just say, BOO FUCKING HOO!
The answer, in the mind of Pelosi et al., is to strip those opponents of their political rights.
Indeed, which is why the right-wing is no longer allowed to vote in federal elections.
Ooh, maybe they are doing back-ended voting laws that just happen to disproportionately disenfranchise voters that tend to be right-wing.
Nope, still nada.
Ah, I get it, they’re using edited footage and manufactured outrages that feed on the media’s obsession with “equality in scandals” in order to unfairly tar an innocent conservative vote-mobilization organizations and thus defund and disband them to try and prevent people from being able to use their legal rights to protest what they view as bad policy!
… Hmm, what is this red flashing light that says IT’S ALWAYS PROJECTION mean and why has it been on this entire time?
The so-called People’s Rights Amendment would have some strange consequences: Newspapers, television networks, magazines, and online journalism operations typically are incorporated.
Yes, and when you marry one and submit a joint tax return, then maybe we can talk about why they shouldn’t be stripped of individual personhood.
Actually, I think this needs to be an interesting protest. Someone forms a corporation, someone else legally marries it using the corporation’s rights as an individual, they submit a federal joint tax return and someone else challenges it because as a corporation doesn’t have a gender, how can we tell if it’s a gay marriage or not.
Tell me that wouldn’t be awesome! C’mon performance artists, time to do something really cool for once in your lives.
So are political parties and campaign committees, to say nothing of nonprofits, business associations, and the like. Under the People’s Rights Amendment, Thomas Friedman would still enjoy putative First Amendment protection, but it would not do him much good inasmuch as the New York Times Company, being a corporation, would no longer be protected by the First Amendment.
Um, no, because Thomas Friedman would still enjoy First Amendment protection. His employer the New York Times being a guy named Newwy wouldn’t really fucking affect him.
Do… do you think people lose their first amendment right’s to their employer when they start working for them?!?
That they only retain them as part of their organization rather than an individual right?
… Cause, that’s a bit more radical than even you’ve been spinning for awhile. I mean, I know the corporations have really been stepping up the whole “we own our employees and their personal lives” thing, but wow…
I’m actually running out of snark with that one. That’s legitimately worrisome.
In short, any political speech more complex than standing on a soapbox at an intersection would be subject to the whims of Nancy Pelosi.
And I’m back.
See, Nancy Pelosi will personally use her Vagina Dentata to fucking end anyone who tries and make a political speech. You’d be like, I don’t like gays and then from the bushes, Nancy Pelosi’s bush just jumps out and ends you. Body parts everywhere. You’ll be like GYARGH and all the bystanders will be like AIEEE and the National Review will be like “I told you” and it’ll be freaky as shit.
Don’t believe me?
Scariest fucking thing you’ll ever see, believe you me.
Representative Donna Edwards, a Maryland Democrat, nonchalantly concluded that the amendment would of course strip even political campaigns of the First Amendment rights: “All of the speech which, whether it’s corporations of campaign committees and others engage in, would be able to be fully regulated under the authority of the Congress.”
Couple of responses:
A) I love how for wingnuts and corporate-whore Democrats, “regulation” is constantly being forced to mean “elimination”. Um, let’s say things were “regulated”. I mean, they’re not, but let’s say it were. That would just mean that it was regulated. That it couldn’t be used to injure someone physically, that it couldn’t be illegal, or it couldn’t use, say, loopholes to openly buy congresspersons and use them as your personal mouthpieces to spout out inane drivel like this. So even in this nightmare universe where campaign speech was regulated, it wouldn’t really affect balls all or be worrisome in the least.
B) Seriously, when did “regulate” become a catch all word of pure Satanic malevolence. Regulations are good. Regulations keep us from needing to have a fully working forensics laboratory so we can individually check every single food item we purchase and source of water. Not to mention allowing us to have any of the infrastructure that allows a complex capitalist economy to even remotely function on anything over an extremely local level.
C) Holy Shitballs Rubbing Inappropriately Against a Religious Figure is this entire section complete and utter bullshit. And not bothering to do even a passable job of hiding it.
The entire point of having a Bill of Rights is that there are some things Congress may not do. “Congress shall make no law” is a phrase that Democrats cannot abide, apparently.
Yeah, that section that goes before “establish a national religion”… ooh, right. Well, at least the rest… oh right, “free speech zones”, the extralegal elimination of the assembly rights of the Occupy movement because they were worrying the people who apparently fucking own our police forces now, not to mention the various violations of too many individuals’ right to vote or practice their religion in peace.
Damn, that blinking IT’S ALWAYS PROJECTION button, keeps distracting me when I feel so close to an epiphany.
One of the great dangers of such efforts to regulate political speech is that it puts incumbents in charge of setting the rules of the game under which their power and their position may be challenged. That is a recipe for abuse and corruption, and for smothering those critics who would draw attention to abuse and corruption.
Trying to stop our attempted abuse and corruption of the political process is itself abuse and corruption.
It’d be novel if it wasn’t the fucking norm for the right-wing since pretty much this country was first founded.
Nancy Pelosi proposes to amend the Constitution the way the iceberg amended the Titanic.
By creating an easily avoided disaster whose main tragedy was caused by a ship who foolishly disregarded all safety protocols and only viewed the rich as fully human meaningful members?
Metaphors that don’t prove the opposition’s case. Find some.
The First Amendment has served us well.
LEAVE THE FIRST AMENDMENT ALONE!
Nancy Pelosi has not,
SHE HAS LADYBITS AND THAT TERRIFIES US MORE THAN YOU COULD EVER IMAGINE!
but she has led her Democrats to a disturbing place in their quest to secure power,
Yes! See what mild attempts to alleviate the worst of the suffering by advocating mild reforms that are mostly slightly less bad ideas the Republicans advocated ten years ago have wrought! Truly in their quest for the power to be repeatedly trounced whenever they propose even the mildest of reforms they have trampled over our very FREEDOMS! Repent liberals at what your mealy-mouthed almost resistance has caused! REPENT!
And seriously, what’s with this IT’S ALWAYS PROJECTION light? It’s now setting off buzzers and alarms and seems to be smoking a bit… Is it entirely safe to be standing here?
even at the cost of cashing in the Bill of Rights.
Aw, shit, now even the BULLSHIT alarm is overheating! The room is now covered in flames and I think I can hear the roar of some form of Elder God.
Save me my noble husband! Bill and Ted’s Excellent Corporation Incorporated, my hero, dash me away from here!
What? You don’t have hands or any physical presence?!?
NOOOOOOO! Why did the liberals have to revoke your personhood?!? My death will surely be on their-
What? They didn’t? You’re just…
Fuck you too, BTECI. Fuck you to death.
Yes, I know, you can’t. Either of them. It was just… oh just fuck off and let me burn you useless pile of donkey piss.
‘Shorter’ concept created by Daniel Davies and perfected by Elton Beard. Sadly, No Industries Incorporated wonders why you won’t return our calls. We can change, baby. Don’t leave us. We are aware of all Internet traditions.™