Hobby Lobby wins Supreme Court Case.

[foghat43]

The really amusing thing about this is that if the Greens were Muslim or atheist, or had been fighting to further the rights of homosexuals…then the Leftists would be falling all over themselves applauding the Supreme Court’s decision. They’d be having parades and talking about what a heroic decision this was. But since the Greens are Christians…not so much.

[downzy]

The really amusing thing about this is that if the Greens were Muslim or atheist, or had been fighting to further the rights of homosexuals…then the Leftists would be falling all over themselves applauding the Supreme Court’s decision. They’d be having parades and talking about what a heroic decision this was. But since the Greens are Christians…not so much.

No. This is about the dangerous precedent that allows companies, not people, but companies to claim religious objections to a law. A company might now find itself to be a Christian Scientist and therefore finds the notion of any healthcare to be against its principles. Or another company might proclaim to be followers of Scientology, and hence all psychiatric services would be therefore cut from its healthcare plans.

I was actually speaking with my cousin who is a sitting judge in the state of Arkansas yesterday (he's here on vacation). He's a Republican, very conservative, but even he had to acknowledge that had Hobby Lobby been a Muslim company objecting to certain provisions of the ACA because it goes against Sharia law that it would have been dismissed. We disagreed over the merits concerning the respective arguments, but at least he was courteous enough to acknowledge the inherent bias that is implicit in this case due to the company's Christian faith.

Edited July 6, 2014 by downzy

[Dazey]

The really amusing thing about this is that if the Greens were Muslim or atheist, or had been fighting to further the rights of homosexualsthen the Leftists would be falling all over themselves applauding the Supreme Courts decision. Theyd be having parades and talking about what a heroic decision this was. But since the Greens are Christiansnot so much.

Of course if the Greens had been Muslims this case would have been bounced out of court so fast that it would never have even made the news.

[downzy]

So…what the Green family is opposed to is the taking of human life…many folks (not just the Greens) equate abortion (morning/week after pills included) with murder. You can’t really expect a man to pay for something that he believes is murder.

They're trying to have it both ways: take all the benefits of corporate legal status, not pay their employees a fair wage so as to allow them to buy their own health insurance, but still demand their right as a corporation to have their religious beliefs observed by their employees.

it's all kinds of bullshit.

Yes, those evil capitalist Christian bastards only pay their employees almost double the national average for minimum wage. They also opened more than 30 new stores throughout the U.S. last year, which created more than 1,000 new jobs (even in Obama’s shitty economy). And the last time I checked they still don’t demand a confession in Christ as lord and savior as a requirement of employment.

You mean that shitty economy that added nearly 300k jobs last month, and over 300k jobs in April?

Yes, that is exactly the shitty economy I was referring to….But sure, let's just generalize, quote bogus numbers, and only look at the surface to prove a point.

“In reality, the desperation in which these tenuous data straws were grasped is a testament to our chronic economic weakness. Far more significant than the number of jobs that were created in April were the far greater number of jobs that were lost (806,000) because chronically unemployed Americans gave up on their fruitless quests to find work. This trend has been ongoing for years. The latest exodus of workers pushed the labor force participation rate down from 63.2% to 62.8%, an unusually sharp monthly drop. “

“What should have been of particular concern, but was not even mentioned, was that more than 80% of the 288,000 jobs came from birth/death assumptions the government makes about the net number of new companies that formed during the month and the number of people those companies would have been expected to hire. For some reason the statisticians always assign a disproportionally high number of these assumed jobs to April and May.”

“The story even gets worse when you consider the types of jobs that are being added. As has been the case for years, the new hires are heavily weighted to the lower end of the spectrum, particularly in low-paying service sector and retail jobs. The drop in the labor participation rate would not be so alarming if those who remained working were finding jobs that could support families. But that is not what is happening. We are replacing good jobs with bad jobs and getting poorer with each passing month.”

http://www.lewrockwell.com/2014/05/peter-schiff/a-musical-lesson-for-your-money/

Yeah, because I'm going to listen to the guy who's been preaching about the coming onslaught of rising inflation for the last five years. Still waiting on that.

If you're going to suggest that the official job creation number and unemployment rate is wrong, then I guess you have never accepted a single report the Labour Department has released on the topic. Investors who dumped a lot of money into the stock market following the results must know something you and Schiff do not.

This is just sour grapes that people pull out of their asses when the economy does well and their guy isn't in the White House. Had Romney been President I can guarantee you Schiff wouldn't be shitting on the numbers that almost all economists are pleased with. It's like the assholes who felt they needed to "unskew" the polling results during the 2012 Presidential election.

Edited July 6, 2014 by downzy

[foghat43]

So…what the Green family is opposed to is the taking of human life…many folks (not just the Greens) equate abortion (morning/week after pills included) with murder. You can’t really expect a man to pay for something that he believes is murder.

They're trying to have it both ways: take all the benefits of corporate legal status, not pay their employees a fair wage so as to allow them to buy their own health insurance, but still demand their right as a corporation to have their religious beliefs observed by their employees.

it's all kinds of bullshit.

Yes, those evil capitalist Christian bastards only pay their employees almost double the national average for minimum wage. They also opened more than 30 new stores throughout the U.S. last year, which created more than 1,000 new jobs (even in Obama’s shitty economy). And the last time I checked they still don’t demand a confession in Christ as lord and savior as a requirement of employment.

You mean that shitty economy that added nearly 300k jobs last month, and over 300k jobs in April?

Yes, that is exactly the shitty economy I was referring to….But sure, let's just generalize, quote bogus numbers, and only look at the surface to prove a point.

“In reality, the desperation in which these tenuous data straws were grasped is a testament to our chronic economic weakness. Far more significant than the number of jobs that were created in April were the far greater number of jobs that were lost (806,000) because chronically unemployed Americans gave up on their fruitless quests to find work. This trend has been ongoing for years. The latest exodus of workers pushed the labor force participation rate down from 63.2% to 62.8%, an unusually sharp monthly drop. “

“What should have been of particular concern, but was not even mentioned, was that more than 80% of the 288,000 jobs came from birth/death assumptions the government makes about the net number of new companies that formed during the month and the number of people those companies would have been expected to hire. For some reason the statisticians always assign a disproportionally high number of these assumed jobs to April and May.”

“The story even gets worse when you consider the types of jobs that are being added. As has been the case for years, the new hires are heavily weighted to the lower end of the spectrum, particularly in low-paying service sector and retail jobs. The drop in the labor participation rate would not be so alarming if those who remained working were finding jobs that could support families. But that is not what is happening. We are replacing good jobs with bad jobs and getting poorer with each passing month.”

http://www.lewrockwell.com/2014/05/peter-schiff/a-musical-lesson-for-your-money/

Yeah, because I'm going to listen to the guy who's been preaching about the coming onslaught of rising inflation for the last five years. Still waiting on that.

If you're going to suggest that the official job creation number and unemployment rate is wrong, then I guess you have never accepted a single report the Labour Department has released on the topic. Investors who dumped a lot of money into the stock market following the results must know something you and Schiff do not.

This is just sour grapes that people pull out of their asses when the economy does well and their guy isn't in the White House. Had Romney been President I can guarantee you Schiff wouldn't be shitting on the numbers that almost all economists are pleased with. It's like the assholes who felt they needed to "unskew" the polling results during the 2012 Presidential election.

So when Schiff states that …

“Far more significant than the number of jobs that were created in April were the far greater number of jobs that were lost (806,000) because chronically unemployed Americans gave up on their fruitless quests to find work. This trend has been ongoing for years. The latest exodus of workers pushed the labor force participation rate down from 63.2% to 62.8%, an unusually sharp monthly drop.”

“What should have been of particular concern, but was not even mentioned, was that more than 80% of the 288,000 jobs came from birth/death assumptions the government makes about the net number of new companies that formed during the month and the number of people those companies would have been expected to hire. For some reason the statisticians always assign a disproportionally high number of these assumed jobs to April and May.”

“The story even gets worse when you consider the types of jobs that are being added. As has been the case for years, the new hires are heavily weighted to the lower end of the spectrum, particularly in low-paying service sector and retail jobs. The drop in the labor participation rate would not be so alarming if those who remained working were finding jobs that could support families. But that is not what is happening. We are replacing good jobs with bad jobs and getting poorer with each passing month.”

…he just pulled all of those facts, numbers, statistics “out of his ass” because he doesn’t like Obama being in the White House??!! LOL…OK. (Schiff wasn't a huge fan of Bush either, by the way...but let's not confuse the issue with more facts)

I don’t need an “expert” to prove inflation to me…I’m a consumer and can see the effects of it every time I buy groceries, clothes, etc. $100 buys a lot less than it did just a few years ago, regardless of what some government report says. Do you even live in the States, downzy??

Bush and the GOP screwed up the economy also with their bailouts, wars, etc. And, yes, Obama got dealt a bad hand when he took over Bush’s train wreck. But…unlike you, I can be critical of both sides of the aisle because I have no love for or loyalty to either one. Both parties are Statist/collectivist in nature, and neither is the friend of the free market or individual liberty. It’s amusing how quick you people are to get your panties in a wad whenever Obama is criticized. And the "experts" (like Krugman...LOL) who provide cover for Obama's failed policies are always right when they use facts, numbers, stats...but everyone who is opposed...well, of course they must have just pulled their facts, numbers, stats "out of their ass".

Oh, and if you think that America’s liberal media, it’s courts, it’s schools, it’s entertainment industry (or any aspect of American society) has a bias that actually favors Christianity…well, that is so far out of touch with reality I don’t even know how to respond to that. If that were true we wouldn’t have Roe v. Wade, gay marriage, etc.

Edited July 6, 2014 by foghat43

[downzy]

Schiff is neither a doctorate nor a trained economist. He has a B.A. in finance and accounting. Compare this to the numerous doctorates who would take issue with his "facts, numbers, statistics," and I would again have a hard time taking his take over the jobs report. His first point regarding the number of jobs lost is misapplied. Most economists would attribute a shrinking labour pool to the fact that the baby boomer generation is retiring. He's right, the trends has been happening for years, but not for the reasons he's attributing to them. He claims as though it's a matter of fact that the exodus of workers "pushed from the labor force" is a result of a bad economy, and not for the simple fact that many Americans are retiring.

I do agree that wages have not picked up, and a lot of that has to do with the fact that not as many jobs are high paying jobs. But whether this has anything to do with Obama's economic policies or the realities of globalization and mechanization is another matter.

Nice that you rely on anecdotal evidence regarding inflation. Fuck what trained economists say, you know what's really going on because potatoes seem more expensive.

Finally, the courts are not static. Roe. V. Wade was decided in the early 70s with a completely different makeup. Today's SC is a very different court that has been repealing many of long established precedents. The Supreme Court is not the media, it's not the schools, it's an institution that his been shaped by a series of Republican Presidents appointing their guys for decades.

[foghat43]

Nice that you rely on anecdotal evidence regarding inflation. Fuck what trained economists say, you know what's really going on because potatoes seem more expensive.

Well, not exactly...just fuck what "experts" like downzy and Krugman say in favor of what other economists say. Believe it or not there are other schools of thought out their besides the one that you adhere to. And, yes, I absolutely believe what my own eyes and experience tell me to be true even when it contradicts a government report or a Krugman propaganda piece. I know it drives folks like you nuts that some folks don't put their blind faith in your experts or the almighty State...but maybe you should turn off MSNBC some time and try thinking for yourself too...you might find it liberating. Or would that set a "dangerous precedent"....

[Ace Nova]

What they should have done is offer a plan with birth control and another without. Problem solved.

[bran]

What they should have done is offer a plan with birth control and another without. Problem solved.

there you go with that whole fucking common sense thing.

[downzy]

Nice that you rely on anecdotal evidence regarding inflation. Fuck what trained economists say, you know what's really going on because potatoes seem more expensive.

Well, not exactly...just fuck what "experts" like downzy and Krugman say in favor of what other economists say. Believe it or not there are other schools of thought out their besides the one that you adhere to. And, yes, I absolutely believe what my own eyes and experience tell me to be true even when it contradicts a government report or a Krugman propaganda piece. I know it drives folks like you nuts that some folks don't put their blind faith in your experts or the almighty State...but maybe you should turn off MSNBC some time and try thinking for yourself too...you might find it liberating. Or would that set a "dangerous precedent"....

I think thats his problem, all his degree's have indoctrinated him to see a particular viewpoint at the exclusion of all others and common sense too to a degree.

No. What has "indoctrinated" me are statistics, data, and figures that aren't warped or provided without context to prove an ideology.

Someone who takes the most recent jobs report and casts it negatively is not someone anyone should be taken seriously. Arguing that the unemployment rate went down solely as a result of people giving up looking for work is just plainly wrong. Such an assertion ignores the realities of a changing demographic, with the baby boomer generation retiring on mass.

I prefer to base my assessment on simple charts like these (http://qz.com/229970/the-most-important-charts-from-the-terrific-us-jobs-report/#/h/82981,1/) rather than someone who is repeatedly wrong and has lost a ton of money for those who have invested with him in the last five years.

But here we have someone posting an "expert" who does not consider such a factor. When pointed out, the only retort is an ad hominem. When you can't make your point without getting personal, you've lost the debate.

Edited July 7, 2014 by downzy

[foghat43]

But here we have someone posting an "expert" who does not consider such a factor. When pointed out, the only retort is an ad hominem. When you can't make your point without getting personal, you've lost the debate.

Sorry, but "when pointed out" by you it just doesn't hold much water (for me anyway)...thanks, but no thanks, I'll stick with Schiff's assessment (and other Austrian economists) along with the "anecdotal evidence" over your opinions and the Krugmans of the world. It's really not about winning a "debate" on the GnR forum for me. But hey...if it means that much to you...you win. Congrats.

[foghat43]

On the subject of ad hominem, from what I've seen you are the first to resort to such things, in my case at least anyways.

And all I did was suggest that he be a little more skeptical and less trusting of the State's "experts", their propaganda and the liberal media...and start thinking for himself a bit more...but I guess that was an ad hominem attack. Whereas implying that I was an idiot because I can clearly see the effects of inflation with my own eyes...well, I guess that was not an ad hominem attack. He can attack us with insults and sarcasm, but we can't do the same...sounds fair.

[downzy]

http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2014-07-02/austrian-economists-9-11-truthers-and-brain-worms

[Georgy Zhukov]

We are a Christian nation. Anyone's who's not a Christian is not an American.

[foghat43]

http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2014-07-02/austrian-economists-9-11-truthers-and-brain-worms

Nice try downzy…but it's nothing but a smear piece full of rhetoric and straw men…

http://bastiat.mises.org/2014/07/mainstream-economist-freaks-out/

http://bastiat.mises.org/2014/05/from-noahpinion-to-no-clue/

http://bastiat.mises.org/2013/06/noah-idea-about-the-austrians/

And you must have been really desperate to resort to using Noah Smith as one of your “experts”. If I don’t take Paul “Nobel Prize winning” Krugman seriously…do you really expect me to find this guy credible? This kid has no credentials whatsoever. In fact, with your love for degrees and other so called evidences of higher learning and academic credibility I’m surprised you would even take this guy seriously.

Correct me if I’m wrong but…Dr. Smith is a non-tenured, assistant professor fresh out of graduate school (2012) who has no published articles in peer-reviewed academic journals in the field of economics, and no published books. Unfortunately his articles as an unpaid blogger on Bloomberg do not count for tenure. Nor do his articles on his personal blog. Now…whether or not he has these things on his CV means very little to me…but you have made it quite clear in your posts that having these types of academic credentials is very important to you. So it would seem that by your own standards we can easily dismiss anything Noah has to say. And the fact that you get your info about Austrian economics form the likes of him…well, that speaks volumes about the actual familiarity you have with that school of thought which you vainly attempt to discredit …so all you’ve really accomplished is exposing how ignorant both you and Noah are when it comes to Austrian economics. Cheers.

[downzy]

http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2014-07-02/austrian-economists-9-11-truthers-and-brain-worms

Nice try downzy…but it's nothing but a smear piece full of rhetoric and straw men…

http://bastiat.mises.org/2014/07/mainstream-economist-freaks-out/

http://bastiat.mises.org/2014/05/from-noahpinion-to-no-clue/

http://bastiat.mises.org/2013/06/noah-idea-about-the-austrians/

And you must have been really desperate to resort to using Noah Smith as one of your “experts”. If I don’t take Paul “Nobel Prize winning” Krugman seriously…do you really expect me to find this guy credible? This kid has no credentials whatsoever. In fact, with your love for degrees and other so called evidences of higher learning and academic credibility I’m surprised you would even take this guy seriously.

Correct me if I’m wrong but…Dr. Smith is a non-tenured, assistant professor fresh out of graduate school (2012) who has no published articles in peer-reviewed academic journals in the field of economics, and no published books. Unfortunately his articles as an unpaid blogger on Bloomberg do not count for tenure. Nor do his articles on his personal blog. Now…whether or not he has these things on his CV means very little to me…but you have made it quite clear in your posts that having these types of academic credentials is very important to you. So it would seem that by your own standards we can easily dismiss anything Noah has to say. And the fact that you get your info about Austrian economics form the likes of him…well, that speaks volumes about the actual familiarity you have with that school of thought which you vainly attempt to discredit …so all you’ve really accomplished is exposing how ignorant both you and Noah are when it comes to Austrian economics. Cheers.

You really don't do yourself much favour with every post. Noah Smith has his doctorate in finance. Sure, it may be recent, but tell me, where did Schiff get his MBA or PHD on the matter? Oh, that's right, he doesn't have one. So we're suppose to take the assessment of someone with little education on the matter and who has many erroneous predictions over someone who spent years having his work peer-reviewed in order to obtain a doctorate in the matter. Not sure if you know how obtaining one's doctorate works, but all doctoral work gets peer reviewed.

It's also interesting that few links you provide above do not, in almost any way, seek to rebut the direct evidence Smith and others, like Krugman, offer. The many graphs, statistics, and figures that Keynesian economists use to discredit the arguments made by the Austrian-economists are never dealt with directly. Instead, you see the same logic employed by those who preach the coming rapture. "No, no, the apocalypse is coming next year, not last year like we previously said!" Moreover, the authors you link to would rather snip around the edges, calling into question comments made by Smith on how "mainstream" Austrian-economic theory has become. In that sense I don't blame them, since actually having to defend their previously failed predictions would be a much more difficult prospect.

Granted, Smith does use antagonizing and inflammatory language, but the nuts and bolts of his argument holds up to scrutiny. It's why none of the commenters you link to have little to say on the main components of his article: "When the Austrian brain-worm invades, you start believing things like: 1) Federal Reserve money-printing is a government plot to boost big banks, 2) prices are rising much faster than anyone thinks, 3) real “inflation” means money-printing, not an increase in prices, 4) printing money can never boost the economy, 5) academic economics is a plot to use mathematical mumbo-jumbo to cover up government giveaways to big banks, etc., etc." Not one of the commentators that you link to bothers to support any of these assertions that have been the heart of the Austrian-economic school. And why is that? Possibly because they're all factually wrong.

Foghat, look back to the many posts you have made on this issue and recognize that you have used almost all of these arguments. And what do you and other like minded individuals provide to support these assertions? Nothing more than your own anecdotal evidence: "I don't care what the core CPI is telling me, I know from my own personal shopping that prices are higher." You and Schiff can believe in whatever you want based on your own private experiences, but since many measures within economics can be quantified, I'll go with the data.

Edited July 8, 2014 by downzy

[foghat43]

Again...the desperate hole you dig just gets deeper. When you say things like the Austrians have nothing more than their "own anecdotal evidence" you only show your ignorance about Austrian economics... as if Schiff and their grocery store receipts are all they have to support their theories. This only exposes the fact that you are not familiar with any of the authors, economists, studies, history, etc. of this school of thought. It is the height of both arrogance and ignorance to mock things you have no uderstanding of.

"Certainly no Austrian economists has ever maintained that one can provide a detailed analysis of actual business cycles, or monetary policy, or any aspect of applied economics without careful, detailed, empirical study. It might surprise Smith (and downzy) to know that Mises wrote detailed empirical studies of prewar business cycles and European monetary policy, that Rothbard produced a 368-page treatise on the Great Depression, and that contemporary Austrians have written about the credit collapse, quantitative easing, and just about anything else in recent economic policy. Noah (and downzy), use the Google!"

Bit of advice for you...Better to remain silent (on things you know nothing about) and be thought a fool than to speak and to remove all doubt.

This is my last parting shot downzy...I grow weary of beating my head against a wall. Besides I've already conceded that you are the grand champion debater of the GnR forum...now all you have to do is reply to this post and you can even have the last word...I'm done.

Cheers!

[sweetness]

Maybe I totally missed this but... is it normal for companies to offer birth control in their medical plans? Like has that been going on?

This whole thing just reeks of "non-story" to me

[downzy]

Again...the desperate hole you dig just gets deeper. When you say things like the Austrians have nothing more than their "own anecdotal evidence" you only show your ignorance about Austrian economics... as if Schiff and their grocery store receipts are all they have to support their theories. This only exposes the fact that you are not familiar with any of the authors, economists, studies, history, etc. of this school of thought. It is the height of both arrogance and ignorance to mock things you have no uderstanding of.

"Certainly no Austrian economists has ever maintained that one can provide a detailed analysis of actual business cycles, or monetary policy, or any aspect of applied economics without careful, detailed, empirical study. It might surprise Smith (and downzy) to know that Mises wrote detailed empirical studies of prewar business cycles and European monetary policy, that Rothbard produced a 368-page treatise on the Great Depression, and that contemporary Austrians have written about the credit collapse, quantitative easing, and just about anything else in recent economic policy. Noah (and downzy), use the Google!"

Bit of advice for you...Better to remain silent (on things you know nothing about) and be thought a fool than to speak and to remove all doubt.

This is my last parting shot downzy...I grow weary of beating my head against a wall. Besides I've already conceded that you are the grand champion debater of the GnR forum...now all you have to do is reply to this post and you can even have the last word...I'm done.

Cheers!

I think I see where the disconnect is. You think that simply because someone writes about something that we should take them seriously. Simply writing on a subject doesn't render you correct.

The fact of the matter is that the Austrian-economic model fails when evaluated for reality. If their studies were so careful, detailed, and based on empirical data, then why does most of their policy prescriptions either miss their mark or fail in their projections? Even Milton Friedman lambasted people like Rothbard, calling his analysis of the Great Depression very damaging.

People like Mises, Rothbard, Krugman, Schiff, Smith, etc. are either right or wrong with their predictions. Each proposes a different model based on different assumptions and reality puts each to the test. And so far, it would appear, the Austrian school of economics fails in most of its predictions. It's why you consistently see defenders of that school of thought continually moving the goal posts, like a born-again Christian who keeps preaching about the coming rapture. When Schiff missed badly on his inflation projections, what did he do? Did he acknowledge that he was wrong? No, of course not. That would be the rational thing to do. Instead, he doubles down and proclaims that his projections aren't wrong, but that the timeline just needed to be extended. Nevermind that most people who invested with him took a bath and lost a ton of money.

Rather than spend most of your time speaking poorly about the knowledge base of others, why not instead focus your time on proving the Austrian-economic ethos with real world data? It's both sad and funny that supply-side economic theorists spend so much time disparaging others when most of their own predictions have failed to pan out.

[downzy]

Maybe I totally missed this but... is it normal for companies to offer birth control in their medical plans? Like has that been going on?

This whole thing just reeks of "non-story" to me

It's fairly typical for most health plans offered by corporations to include birth control. Since 47 percent of the workforce is comprised of women, and most women would want contraception included in their plans, the ruling is a big deal for a lot of people who get their health insurance from their employer (which is a vast majority in the U.S.).

It may seem like a non-story to yourself, but it may become more pertinent if you ever find yourself employed at a company who suddenly "found God" and now no longer believed in covering medications/procedures that may be relative to you. Some say it's overblown, but by validating the notion that corporations have religious rights, and such religious rights supersede the religious or healthcare rights of its employees, the Supreme Court has given an avenue for corporations to avoid their legal responsibilities relating to their employee's health insurance.

[luciusfunk]

Except they do cover most forms of birth control.

Edited July 8, 2014 by luciusfunk

[shades]

, but by validating the notion that corporations have religious rights,

the notion that "people" have religious rights you mean?

your world is so small you truly have no clue that some may not want to live in it do you?

most places of employment have this little Health Care package you are welcome to look trough before you decide to take the job

Edited July 8, 2014 by shades

[downzy]

, but by validating the notion that corporations have religious rights,

the notion that "people" have religious rights you mean?

your world is so small you truly have no clue that some may not want to live in it do you?

most places of employment have this little Health Care package you are welcome to look trough before you decide to take the job

No, I meant corporations, not people. There's a difference. Do corporations go to church? Can they go to heaven? Hell?

Can people, as persons, claim limited liability when things go wrong? Do they get to pay corporate tax rates?

Do you have just the slightest sense how and why corporations and people are not the same? Both before the law and just more in general? Are you so daft that a corporation is now given the same constitutional protections as people, something the Founders greatly resisted?

But sure, keep up with the ad hominems. It's not as though anything else you spew makes any sense to anyone other than yourself.

[arnold layne]

We are a Christian nation. Anyone's who's not a Christian is not an American.

[Georgy Zhukov]

We are a Christian nation. Anyone's who's not a Christian is not an American.

'Murica!