I am a well armed Democrat.
But I admit I’m in the minority.
The fact that he is the most promising chance that they’ve had in years to be freed to buy up whole markets is one possibility.
Come up to VT, we’re a dark blue state, and hunting here is what football is in Texas. If the war comes down to hanging out in the woods and sniping at the other side, we win!! As long as we can drink beer while we’re out there.
'Course those are hunting rifles, you still might need to rely on the Repubs for the heavier, kill your neighbor type guns.
Maybe the line between STATE and CORPORATION is getting a little too fuzzy for comfort? You confuse corporatism with libertarianism at your own peril.
Tacky?
“When fascism comes to this country, it won’t be with jack-boots, it will be with these sneakers with lights on them-the happy button, the smiley button on their shirt, and it will be a friendly guy shaking hands.” - George Carlin
Yep, tacky sounds right to me.
[QUOTE=annaplurabelle]
Maybe the line between STATE and CORPORATION is getting a little too fuzzy for comfort? You confuse corporatism with libertarianism at your own peril.[/QUOTE
Can you document the specifics of this “coziness” and how it presages a fascist movement? I’m confusing nothing. I don’t even know what “corporatism” is, but the burden is on you to demostrate that one company putting up one billboard is in some way an indication of fascism.
Facisim is a glorification of the state and by extension its leaders. I don’t think that the glorification has to be done by the gov’t, if private corporations do it with billboards or whatever, it’s still facisim. That said, I don’t think that this ClearChannel thing means we’re on the brink of a fourth Reich, but if I start seeing Bush printed on the side of my Happy Meal, cable networks putting in “public service” announcements saying how G. Bush loves his people and my boss gives me the day off for George’s birthday, I’d call it facisim, even though these things are done by private businesses and not the federal gov’t
In that particular discussion, we weren’t talking about fascism, per se, but the comparison was made between Iraq and the US. That didn’t have anything to do with either being fascist.
[QUOTE}Ummm… because the first was done by the state, and the second was done by private individuals.
Hey, I think this kind of stuff is tacky, too, but do you really NOT see the difference between a STATE action and a PRIVATE action?[?QUOTE]
Yep - I can normally see that difference, although that does not address the question I posed. But even seeing that difference, I would tend towards saying that the actions of an egomaniacal dictator, or even an egolaidbackical dictator, are more akin to PRIVATE action than STATE action, fwiw. OTOH, I would also guess that in a strict dicatorship, you could equate almost all allowed public expressions with State action. I guess you could tilt towards windmills of arguments either way on that one. It doesn’t really go to my question.
I would also guess that many of the posters, statues in Iraq were, in fact, put up by individuals in efforts to ingratiate themselves. Do you have some kind of authority to indicate that every poster, picture, statue etc. was in fact errected directly by Hussein?
My issue was that WE somehow found it so inherently distasteful and “wrong” that we went on absolute rampages in Iraq to destroy all the adulatory representations. Are you saying we only did that bc they were put forth by the State and if we had known that any were put up by individuals then we would have said, “Oh, OK, leave that one up, a PRIVATE person put it up?” At this point I could say something unwarranted and snippy about do you really not see … but I won’t. 
In any event, it would be nice to see how the billboards are being handled on the books for tax purposes. I would think it should be treated as a political contribution in the amount of the normal sign rental fee.
[QUOTE=MaryP]
[QUOTE}In any event, it would be nice to see how the billboards are being handled on the books for tax purposes. I would think it should be treated as a political contribution in the amount of the normal sign rental fee.[/QUOTE]
Hmm. Are you clear on what your’re saying? Are you suggesting that they would somehow try to “deduct” this expense? No. They will, necessarily, charge it as either a promotional fee, or as part of their cost of doing business (general promotion and advertisement, and/or political contribution). Neither deductible. Neither charitable. Both consistent with the fact that they are seeking favor with the government.
While I don’t think the billboard is anything other than a local affiliate expressing their pleasure that one of their biggest government benefactors was re-elected is relaly a big deal, and all the hubbub is pretty silly, I’m a little surprised that you are unfamiliar with the history of facism, insofar as it has usually taken the form of collusion between corporate interests and militant, authoritarian politicians.
Happily, while I think Coke and Pepsi are pretty disturbingly powerful (far moreso than any individual citizen, or even citizens of the same number as their total employees), I somehow can’t see them teaming up to rule the world. Although Pepsi did have that fighter jet… 
I’m glad that you’re acknowledging the difference between state sponsorship of a cult or personality (fawning and inappropriate, in my view, but understandable given ClearChannel’s plight) and government sponsorship thereof.
Do I deny the role that “corporate interests” can play, or have played, in a truly fascist government? Not sure. But I think the point is moot, because unlike Weimar Germany or pre-Mussolini Italy, the U.S. has a fairly operative representative government to counter their arguably-compromised and non-credible corporations.
Can anyone really envision GWB claiming the right to hold power beyond his specified elective term if the next election goes against his preferences? Again, I do not discount the bad effects of the Patriot Act or Iraq invasion; I just deplore the melodramatic approach toward viewing GWB’s victoy as endorsement of and kickoff for some effectual conspiratorial program to enact the most basic democratic U.S. institutitions.
Damn. Substitute “state-based individual sponsorship” for “state sponsorship.”
Or . . . “dis-enact.”
Who said I’m “unfamiliar” with that? Where is the collusion, and where is the “militant authoritarian politicians”? Please, please don’t try to make the argument that our government is militant and authoritarian.
Not yet. Over my dead body. Crux of my argument.
[QUOTE=John Mace]
[QUOTE=annaplurabelle]
Maybe the line between STATE and CORPORATION is getting a little too fuzzy for comfort? You confuse corporatism with libertarianism at your own peril.
[/QUOTE
Can you document the specifics of this “coziness” and how it presages a fascist movement? I’m confusing nothing. I don’t even know what “corporatism” is, but the burden is on you to demostrate that one company putting up one billboard is in some way an indication of fascism.[/QUOTE]
If you don’t know what corporatism is, then how can you be sure you’re not confused? 
BTW, just a nitpick, but there is more than one “Our Leader” billboard (last time I checked, at least 3 have been verified). And this isn’t something new for Clear Channel. They own over 780,000 billboards, in addition to their other media holdings.
The “Don’t Vote” billboards:
Sponsoring Pro-War and Anti-Gay rallies:
http://www.ucdadvocate.com/news/2004/11/10/Opinion/The-Suckiness.Of.Clear.Channel-800319.shtml
Clear Channel Overview:
http://www.disinfopedia.org/wiki.phtml?title=Clear_Channel_Worldwide#Bush_Connections
Read again. Apos said it usually takes the form of collusion between corporate interests and militant, authoritarian politicians.
The analogy doesn’t have to fit in every detail! We don’t need to argue that the US is a militant authoritarian govt. Read the Carlin quote again.
To me, it’s not a question of Bush = Hitler (or Saddam, or Stalin, or Il Duce, etc.). It’s about the mindset of US citizens. It’s about people saying “not yet” until it’s too late. It’s about the tragedy of being incapable of learning from history.
So you tell me, at what point is there cause for alarm that isn’t too late to prevent it from happening again?
What that billboard reminded me of more than anything else is the pictures of the Kims everywhere in North Korea. How long until we start seeing people wearing buttons with GWB’s mug on them and the text “Our Great and Glorious Dear Leader”?
It doesn’t work that way. You are the one raising alarm bells. The burden is on YOU to demonstrate that this is the point where it’s “too late” to prevent a slide towards fascism. If you are not making that claim, then we’re in agreement and I don’t understand what point you ARE trying to make.
Actually, MaryP is mostly correct. Advertising and promotion are both deductible expenses to a corporation, whereas political expenses such as lobbying are not. That said, Clear Channel is unlikely to classify it as a “political contribution,” which is not only not deductible but not even permitted; instead, they’ll likely consider it a form of lobbying, which is permitted but not deductible.
If their tax accountants get aggressive for some crazy reason and try to deduct it as a promotion expense (and I’d have to think that “See how many people we got talking about the effectiveness of billboards as an advertising medium?” would be such an accountant’s version of “Hey, y’all! Watch this!” as last words go), even they’d do so only at the direct costs of the thing (production, installation and removal, ground rents if applicable and normal depreciation of the structure) as opposed to their normal rental rate.
Last September’s Republican convention, most likely.