Midcan5's Blog

An interesting point and one worth consideration, no need for another Civil War, this time we just set them free and stop bailing them out etc. What do you think? Freedom, freedom, freedom.... "Now, if it is assumed that corporations are persons and are thus entitled to 1st Amendment rights (at least in the United States) it would certainly seem to follow that they are entitled to all the rights of persons. Or, at the very least, the other constitutional rights. Corporations can, of course, be owned. In fact, common stock is bought and sold as a matter of routine business and provides an ownership share in a corporation. Since corporations are people, this means that people are being allowed to legally own other people. Owning another person is, of course, slavery. While slavery was legal at one time in the United States, the 13th amendment is rather clear on this matter..." Read article here.

There are lots of arguments on why we need a third party candidate or even a third party. The reasons given are simply that the two party system is a groundwork for embedded interests and a third party would create more diversification. In other words a challenge to the status quo. Diversity may be a positive in your portfolio, but is it one in politics? I would argue it is not, and the tea party could be seen as an example of my assumption. The Tea Party grew out of the discontent over change in our 2008 presidential election, but its roots go back much farther. American discontent with their elected representatives has always been a part of the political scene and eventually most presidents lose their glow if events prove cumbersome. Only after they are gone, are they revived in history, and in the minds of the political revisionists. So who is this third party, are they made up solely of the Tea party or do the roots go deeper? David Deutsch in the 'Beginning of Infinity