Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
Guest
Separation of powers doesn't have anything to do with parties, but a balance between the executive, the legislative and the judicial bodies. This balance has shifted some but lately the executive has been the strongest with judicial activism from both liberal and conservative sides. "Citizens United' was considered conservative activism as it allowed more corporate money into politics. If you think that's a good thing then that's your right, but the founders would have disagreed. Look it up. Jefferson in particular was concerned with the power of corporation in the early 19th century. The fledgling US government was reeling from a war caused in part by the corporate interest of the East India company. The East India Company was given a monopoly on the importation of tea in 1773. That was a big catalyst in starting the Revolutionary War.
Again, you are an idiot. You are blaming me for being a typical partisan liberal whatever that means. You are a typical knuckle dragger who definitely needs to go to school to understand what you are talking about. And why did you bring up Bush, I didn't.
What AZ did in promoting Seroquel illegally was not exactly slip on a banana peel. They did it deliberately, and with intent. That's why they paid over $1,000,000,000.00 in fines with more to come. They did not settle because they were innocent but to stop bigger payments through the courts.
Careful there Skippy, AZ settles cases because if they should actually go to trial and lose they will never get another gov't contract and without the gov't contracts you can turn the lights out and lock the door, game over. But don't fret, you lack of understanding judicial litigation does not make you a "knuckle dragger", just uninformed. Happy St. Pat's