Well, between the Massachusetts debacle and the Supremes today, I'd say our country is doomed to fade away, like the Roman, British and Russian empires. An irrational Supreme Court that can not tell the difference between a human being and General Motors will surely lead us over a cliff. A Democratic Party that buckles under the bunch of hypocrite clowns (and MA's newest senator) won't be able to help.
We are walking in the footsteps of declining empires before us, corrupt at the highest levels, manipulated by money (now even more because of the Supremes) and ever more alienated from the people.
This is versus rising Asian nations whose governments are not paralyzed and whose citizens work very, very hard. Whether they are authoritarian or not makes little difference. Like Rome we are constantly at war abroad, but they are not; we are privileged and getting softer and softer, they are not. Quite the opposite. The needs and desires of their citizens and their leadership are in rough concert, ours are not.
I fear for our grandchildren. People who think the United States will last for a thousand years, or will even hold together as a single nation for the next 100 years, are living in a Wonderland.

I have to agree that the USA as we believed it to be is no more. We are not a democracy or a republic, we are a feudal society with corporate lords.
I do hope some attorney general gets the underlying message here. Since the Supremes have clearly said the corporations are persons, then when they commit crimes (say, the thousands of murders committed by the pharmaceutical corporations), they should be arrested and remanded in custody until trial. For a corporation, wouldn't that mean freezing its assets and prohibiting it from engaging in any sales and marketing activity at least? Shouldn't we then have a corporate death penalty? If a corporations is proven guilty (which would be easy if we had the same search capability we have with individuals), then shouldn't their life be ended? Sell their assets off at auction with no reimbursement to the shareholders? If they want to be people, then shouldn't they accept all the liabilities and responsibilities that come with personhood?
You almost have to laugh a bit here. All or national pretense is gone. The emperor is naked and now everyone knows it.
Posted by: Charles D on January 21, 2010 7:02 PMGreat post and comment as well. A dummy could argue against this and win but we didn't win we lost as usual. We always lose. I'm waiting for a win when Harriet Myers come in to testify about them judges getting fired. I know any day now the list of money hiders will come out and that would take care of that ya know. This is serious shit and there are only a couple more nails needed to finish the coffin.
Posted by: One Fly on January 21, 2010 11:21 PMI forgot-great picture and while I'm back this post states what I think as well to the t. The Empire is in a steep decline and disagree on the 100 years. I think it is a great deal less. We're in a world of shit and it will not get better soon if ever.
Posted by: One Fly on January 21, 2010 11:45 PMI propose a Memorial Day March on Washington.
Who's with me?
Posted by: karen marie on January 22, 2010 1:11 AMI have wondered why, if a corporation is considered a person, do they not pay personal income tax as well as FICA.
Posted by: slothrop on January 22, 2010 6:33 AMThis may end up being the worst decision in the history of SCOTUS. However, the decision overturns decisions and policy rendered during Teddy Roosevelt's time, a time when even the Republicans understand that corporations had gained far too much power and trust busting came into vogue.
This very may signal the end of our democracy, although its implications might ultimately have the power to unite many people into a progressive base, turning on their corporate masters, which might even have the possibility of bringing together people with a common interest against corporations, moreseo even than the wrath arose in the American people against corporations, trusts and huge amassed huge wealth during the Robber Baron era.
With media fracturing, the web and other forms of communication may become a a place whereby the power to organize become greater than the power of television and other paid media to influence. I'd argue the jury is still out on the decision.
However this decision has the power to corrupt democracy such that we may be on a road which leads to the ultimate abyss, destroying American democracy and what little is left of the people's faith in their government.
If we are lucky and can shift the debate, we may end up with a situation where the people turn their wrath against government into wrath against corporate interests. If that happens, then the decision may end up being one of the best things that's happened to democracy in 78 years. I think the jury is still out on this decision.
Posted by: Buck on January 22, 2010 11:18 AM
Goodbye, America ...
Posted by: Peter on January 22, 2010 1:42 PMThe good news is, this does not really signal the end of our democracy.
The bad news is, that's because Reagan's election sealed that particular deal 30 years ago.
Although that timeline is rather glib. I personally date the failure of the American experiment to the Iran-Contra Affair, when those charged by the Constitution with holding the president to account for violations of the law opted not to do so on the grounds that the president was too popular. By an odd coincidence, nearly everyone who should have (or even did, in some cases) served prison time would up either in the Bush Administration or with syndicated talk shows.
What happened yesterday is troubling not because it signals the end of our democracy, but because it signals that 'they' no longer care who knows it. Our radical right friends no longer feel like they have to pretend to be anything other than what they are.
It's like watching a stage magician bellow at the audience, "Don't look at the pretty girl. I have everything up my sleeve, and there isn't fuck-all you can do about it!"
Posted by: Roddy McCorley on January 22, 2010 3:34 PMHas any country successfully existed under corporatism?
Posted by: Anonymous on January 22, 2010 7:19 PM