Here's an interesting take on how we could solve some our problems ...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/josh-s...b_2909150.html

On Wed, 20 Mar 2013 23:13:43 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 20 Mar 2013 11:50:22 -0700, Urin Asshole
wrote:

Here's an interesting take on how we could solve some our problems ...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/josh-s...b_2909150.html

That is actually not a bad dream but the people who actually run the
country will never let it happen and the TV networks won't even let us
have a serious public discussion about it.

In that regard there will be a consensus between Fox/ Newscorp,
NBC/Univerrsal, Disney/ABC and CBS/Viacom along with all of the
smaller players. There is simply too much money at stake.

Virtually all of the billions that the special interests bribe
congress with, goes to these media players.

They will say it is curtailing your freedom and it is a constitutional
violation, the same way that nobody in media really complained about
Citizens United.

Yeah, well, **** them. I don't watch that much tv, except for the
zombie show Walking Dead on AMC and channel flipping from time to
time, and History and such.

The problem really needs to get addressed. I liked the argument that
said it's going ot be hard to get an amendment through (generally a
good thing.. it should be hard), but if anything is going to improve
we need to get away from the money in politics.

On Wed, 20 Mar 2013 23:51:15 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 20 Mar 2013 20:20:42 -0700, Urin Asshole
wrote:

On Wed, 20 Mar 2013 23:13:43 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 20 Mar 2013 11:50:22 -0700, Urin Asshole
wrote:

Here's an interesting take on how we could solve some our problems ...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/josh-s...b_2909150.html

That is actually not a bad dream but the people who actually run the
country will never let it happen and the TV networks won't even let us
have a serious public discussion about it.

In that regard there will be a consensus between Fox/ Newscorp,
NBC/Univerrsal, Disney/ABC and CBS/Viacom along with all of the
smaller players. There is simply too much money at stake.

Virtually all of the billions that the special interests bribe
congress with, goes to these media players.

They will say it is curtailing your freedom and it is a constitutional
violation, the same way that nobody in media really complained about
Citizens United.

Yeah, well, **** them. I don't watch that much tv, except for the
zombie show Walking Dead on AMC and channel flipping from time to
time, and History and such.

The problem really needs to get addressed. I liked the argument that
said it's going ot be hard to get an amendment through (generally a
good thing.. it should be hard), but if anything is going to improve
we need to get away from the money in politics.

I think getting money out of politics is a great idea but I just do
not see the path to doing it unless we had some kind of judicial
activism from the court and that is unlikely.
It is not going to come from a congress that was installed there by
the same big money that we want to get rid of.

I think we have plenty of judicial activism.. Citizens United was an
example of that.

Another article I read made the argument that disclosure should be
enforced (Republicans don't want this because they believe that it
violates privacy) and there should be no or a high limit for
individual contributions, which would make PACs irrelevent. The
Democrats don't like this, because they don't think it will help.

I'd like it if both were put in place, and I think that's possible if
the two moderate wings and forge some sort of compromise.