What do the Supreme Court decisions of "Dred Scott and Citizens United" have in common? Individual rights vs Human rights

4 posts / 0 new

Dred Scott, the individual slave owner had the rights of the 3/5 of slave as a vote in Congress. Citizen United, the individual corporate owner has the rights of all the corporate money(aka,slave'workers) as a vote in "government". One decision led to a civil war,can the other decision repeat history? A war was fought over race not having more rights then another. What make modern republicans supporting the rights of corporation having the rights of a person,blind to the comparison, money like race has more rights then "others"? 1%/Republicans, you`re on the wrong side of history again. Lincoln offer a deal to the slave states during the war for the slaves,now you trying for complete control of government to avoid making a deal in losing power. What`s the old saying "pay me now or pay me later,you will pay"! What`s the price for human rights? 1/2 million dead in civil war and still divide country,can anybody but the "insane" think of affording a price that can be much much worse! Progressive 1% don`t let the "insane" 1% speak/act for you, work on economic justice, jobs & a safety net(worldwide),maybe repeating history can be avoided.

tayl44's picture
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm


Wow... read the actually ruling... Then you wouldn't make such ignorant and offensive posts..

Capital1's picture
Jul. 31, 2012 6:38 am

What offends you Cap? I don't want to get into an analysis of tay's hermeneutics, but apart from making an analogy stretch beyond the cases cited, all he does is get the large picture pretty close to correct despite the ramble. He does not insult anyone who does not deserve it. If you want to attack ignorance, you might have a case, but offensive?

Apr. 26, 2012 11:15 am

Cap,your post is the answer to why the "empire graveyard" is never close! The 1% never learn from there mistakes! What is ignorant and offensive to the 1% is the reason them decisions cause the downfall of the systems. You can "nitpick" all you want around "individual rights vs majority rights",you cannot get away from the fact that "MAJORITY RULES"! Pity the fool that think otherwise! Drc2, thanks for seeing the big picture,that`s a real problem for 1% representatives. I use common sense in moving the dots between these two cases. And one important dot i added,congress people pass laws without reading all,seeing the effects is what's important. How many laws match with the "letter" of the law? I base my logic on the "effect" of the law. Cap and the other crazies on the court want to argue the letter and be blind to the effect. Money and power have them living in the "Twilight Zone" of hell. Drc2,i will be honor to have my ignorance attack by the 1%

tayl44's picture
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

Latest Headlines

One Iowa Caucus Delegate Comes Down To Coin Toss

The Iowa caucus convener flipped a coin. Bernie Sanders supporters called "heads" and it landed on tails.

Bernie Sanders leads Hillary Clinton by 31 points in N.H.: Poll

Sanders was at 61 percent support in the University of Massachusetts Lowell/7News poll, followed by Mrs. Clinton, at 30 percent

Martin O'Malley suspends presidential campaign after Iowa caucuses

The announcement came after O'Malley barely registered in Iowa against his better-known rivals Clinton and Sanders, failing to meet already low expectations

Comparing 2016 America to 1972 America Doesn't Work

Bernie Sanders' big win in New Hampshire has given his campaign a big boost, but even Bernie knows that there's still a long primary season ahead.

One of the biggest criticisms about Bernie Sanders, one that I hear frequently from pro-Clinton callers, is that Bernie Sanders could be the next George McGovern.

And it's a serious criticism that's being thrown at Bernie.

Powered by Drupal, an open source content management system