The Rooster
"Okeydoke"
Saturday, January 23, 2010
The Robert's Court is incompetent. They have removed the 'human' component to speech in the recent decision.
This is a bipedal robot. It is a work of interesting design. It took funding, money, to create this robot. I am not saying the robot is a bad entity. That is not the point. But, if a corporation can remove the idea of 'human speech' to super impose it on a solid entity such as money, what is to say that can't be done elsewhere?
The Robert's Court literally stated that a 'legal entity' called a corporation has a 'form of speech' called money. Money is a legal issue of the USA Treasury, Federal Reserve.
The traditional definition of the Supreme Court to 'speech' has been interpreted as a human capacity. Art, film, protest, burning flags and speech itself is all a method of human expression. And there is a limit on that expression. One cannot walk into a theater and yell fire, okay?
What the Robert's Court did was to remove the 'human' aspect of speech and replaced it with 'legal tender' used in economic trade in the market place. That is incompetent. A corporation is a legal entity no different than money is. That does not mean is has automatic rights under the USA Constitution. The USA Constitution was written to protect people, not 'legal entities' such as paper money or its capacity.
In expressing my right to Freedom of Speech I can burn a dollar bill or many dollar bills in varying denominations. If that money is mine, I have a right to do that. Now, that the Robert's Court has made money a protected entity within the capacity of the USA Constitution can I go to jail in my protest of burning money because it has a legal right equal to mine?
The Robert's Court has opened Pandora's Box here and they don't even know it, nor do they care.
A Corporation is NOT born with rights under the USA Consitution. No one gives birth to a corporation. It is a legal instrument generated by people to gain rights under economic laws of the USA.
Let me put that again.
A CORPORATION IS A LEGAL INSTRUMENT GENERATED BY PEOPLE TO GAIN RIGHTS/ADVANTAGE UNDER ECONOMIC LAWS.
It has no rights equivalent to a citizen until this hideous decision stripping the AMERICAN CITIZEN of protections from the capacity of corporations within the market place for political gaming.
The recent decision of the Robert's Court is incompetent. It dehumanizes the American citizen and victimizes them reducing their capacity of Freedom of Speech to an economic commodity within the political environment of the American Social Fabric.
The Robert's Court has oppressed the rights of human citizens while elevating the rights of the 'legal tender/instruments' the people have invented to facilitate its economy.
The Robert's Court has oppressed the rights of human citizens in Freedom of Speech and Equal Rights because in order for equality to occur it has to be subsidized to facilitate the Freedom of Speech provided by the USA Constitution of its citizens.
The heinous oppression by The Robert's Court assaults Civil Rights and makes humans compete for Equality against its own governmental instruments. It removes the ability of its citizens to control their own legal instruments. Is that important? Is that dangerous? Yes. Because it 'favors' legal rights of legal instruments over the capacity of citizens to express themselves.
Money should not be awarded civil rights. And it gets more ludicrous when one realizes Gay Marriage isn't even recognized as an equality issue. I mean I don't know else it is. Either Gay Couples are human beings with the same rights as all citizens or they aren't?
The Robert's Court is dangerously incompetent and there needs to be a solution formulated.
The Robert's Court has even handicapped the rights of human citizens because they don't limit the capacity of corporations in the monetary amounts it can spend while there are limits on human speech. The decision is ridiculous and out of control to its corruption of our society.
They completely disregarded the very basis of the decision to protect citizen's equality rights in political capacity.
Public Funding of Presidential Elections (click here)
FOX NEWS is not fair and balanced by the way. They are lying.
iFOX NEWS 'surrogates' what they call 'fair and balanced.' Their surrogates are their own people. Fair and balanced implies there is 'equal time' as allowed by law for a person to address subjects FOX reports on.
First it has to be established that the Murdoch network is actually reporting on something other than a movement they have generated. A movement generated in large part by their 'talk radio' networks. Okay?
Being that movement is a political entity in their commentary, it is actually an editorial. Editorials can ask for 'equal time.' Equal time WITHOUT a surrogate.
What O'Reilly is doing is using the 'equal time' concept as a methodology to deception. He states his network allows equal time to coverage of a political event. However, that equal time is surrogated by the same entity making the editorial commentary in the first place, so in the truest sense of the word, it is not equal time, but, simply deception to that fact.
I don't understand why this is such an issue either. It is completely obvious they have no intention of allowing equal time by opposing parties. They 'self define' that capacity and deny access. That is all about control. The Murdoch media networks aren't fair and balanced, they are controlled to ACHIEVE a specific outcome. It is probably. No. It is definitely litigable.
But, that is the last comment about FOX on this blog.
They are hate mongers.
Probably, no definately dangerous hate mongers. Guns? At town meetings?
Just that simple.
I mean the really funny part about what Beck said regarding Van Jones is just ludicrous. To use Mr. Jones as an example, he never appeared on any of the shows where he was being stigmatized and defamed. And that is what Beck is doing to people. He is defaming them. His comment was that he didn't want Jones to quit, but, simply to admit exactly the 'type' of person he was, a communist, a 911 truther, and how did he get so close to the President? That is slander. I don't know why Beck isn't in court over this stuff?
End.
First it has to be established that the Murdoch network is actually reporting on something other than a movement they have generated. A movement generated in large part by their 'talk radio' networks. Okay?
Being that movement is a political entity in their commentary, it is actually an editorial. Editorials can ask for 'equal time.' Equal time WITHOUT a surrogate.
What O'Reilly is doing is using the 'equal time' concept as a methodology to deception. He states his network allows equal time to coverage of a political event. However, that equal time is surrogated by the same entity making the editorial commentary in the first place, so in the truest sense of the word, it is not equal time, but, simply deception to that fact.
I don't understand why this is such an issue either. It is completely obvious they have no intention of allowing equal time by opposing parties. They 'self define' that capacity and deny access. That is all about control. The Murdoch media networks aren't fair and balanced, they are controlled to ACHIEVE a specific outcome. It is probably. No. It is definitely litigable.
But, that is the last comment about FOX on this blog.
They are hate mongers.
Probably, no definately dangerous hate mongers. Guns? At town meetings?
Just that simple.
I mean the really funny part about what Beck said regarding Van Jones is just ludicrous. To use Mr. Jones as an example, he never appeared on any of the shows where he was being stigmatized and defamed. And that is what Beck is doing to people. He is defaming them. His comment was that he didn't want Jones to quit, but, simply to admit exactly the 'type' of person he was, a communist, a 911 truther, and how did he get so close to the President? That is slander. I don't know why Beck isn't in court over this stuff?
End.
In realizing how Murdoch uses his media network to distract the electorate to benefit 'The Party,'...
... I decided to blog the network. (Click title to entry - thank you)
Murdoch has instructed his network to distract the electorate of 2010 in order to exert control. My observation of their body language Guru above are at the new blog.
The use of this 'body language' nonsense is 'system' through the Murdoch media. When Senator Elect Brown went to Capital Hill, which I thought inappropriate, the female commentator in the morning showed a 'clip' of Brown meeting Senator Kerry. The segment was very touching as they also spoke of a friendship Senator Kerry had made with the Late Ted Kennedy. Well, when the female anchor at FOX NEWS got finished with 'interpreting' the clip, Senator Kerry was made out to be a 'caricature' of his own body language as perscribed by Murdoch.
This is a pre-mediated attach on the Democrat Party in a methodology of hate. It is also systemic through the network. Body language isn't the only assault either.
Murdoch has instructed his network to distract the electorate of 2010 in order to exert control. My observation of their body language Guru above are at the new blog.
The use of this 'body language' nonsense is 'system' through the Murdoch media. When Senator Elect Brown went to Capital Hill, which I thought inappropriate, the female commentator in the morning showed a 'clip' of Brown meeting Senator Kerry. The segment was very touching as they also spoke of a friendship Senator Kerry had made with the Late Ted Kennedy. Well, when the female anchor at FOX NEWS got finished with 'interpreting' the clip, Senator Kerry was made out to be a 'caricature' of his own body language as perscribed by Murdoch.
This is a pre-mediated attach on the Democrat Party in a methodology of hate. It is also systemic through the network. Body language isn't the only assault either.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)