US Supreme Court
From SCOTUSblog:
By now, you have likely heard the news: The Supreme Court ruled yesterday that the government may not keep corporations (and probably, as Lyle reasons in his post yesterday, labor unions) from spending money to support or denounce individual candidates in elections. While the business entities may not give money directly to campaigns, they may seek to persuade the voting public through other means, including ads, especially where these ads were not broadcast. Why? Because the First Amendment guarantees the right to free speech, and political spending is one form of that protected speech.
Free speech was protected for every body in America in this ruling — to include Conservatives and big business. Which means that Liberals are up in arms about the SCOTUS ruling. Though they don’t seem to mind corporations such as the union thugs at SEIU pouring more than $60m into Obama’s coffers during the 2008 elections.
Funny how unions always seem to be exempt from the rules/regulations/laws/taxes that the rest of us are subjected to.
But now Liberals are concerned about elections being purchased by big money corporations? What do they thing unions have been doing for as long as I can remember?
While we do need real campaign finance reform in this country, it shouldn’t be done at the expense of our other rights. You know…like the ones guaranteed in the first amendment.
Email This Post
⋅
Print This Post
This is not a lib vs conserv issue.
This is bad for all citizens.
So, why do you not care about Unions being able to give unchecked to their (Democrat) candidate of choice to the tune of hundreds of gazillion dollars (~), but you care if the folks at Anheuser Busch fund a television ad to support their favorite beer-swilling candidate?
The funny thing about corporations? They’re made up of people. It’s true. I’ve checked into it.
Robbie, it’s Steven saying that.
Him having a cogent answer is expecting too much.
Corporations are far more responsible for their actions by share holders, than 501c organizations are too anyone.
Unions are made up of people too, just like corporations.
Unions being allowed to give unchecked is as bad as corporations.
First you say this:
Then you say this:
You are not merely an idiot, but really most sincerely an idiot, as well as a fraud/liar/plagiarist/nutjob.
Since you know how to check IP addresses, smart guy, you will see that you quoted someone else.
Try again.
NO2 is old and confused. He cant keep up with which anon said what.
My mistake, it was an anonymous from Austin.
It would simplify things if you would just post your stupid name again.
I can do it for you, if you like.
I dont need you attempting to keep up with the discussion, so no, dont edit my responses.
Ha!
Editing your ridiculous comments isn’t my intent, only to make certain everyone knows it is the fraud/liar/plagiarist/nutjob steven/ryan/mike/tol.
I know y’all talk to each other constantly, so when are you going to let them out and play, with their blatantly hostile racist ideas?
Let me quote as I have at other sites “Congress shall make no law… abridging the freedom of speech”. It is a statement that what? Tells us what congress CANNOT do, which they have ignored and proceeded to enact laws barring the freedom of speech. Perhaps it’s too simple for over educated technocrats to understand.
Corporation are not people or citizens. Their personhood are legal fictions. My free speech will now never be able to compete with the buying power of these non-people.
Do you think your “free speech” was ever able to compete with the buying power of the George Soros of the world before?
It is now permanently unable to compete.
Congrats to those who think this is a good move. You are celebrating the end of the voice of the individual.
You are celebrating the end of the voice of the individual.
No, dummie. We are celebrating the upholding of the Constitution. It’s irrelevant whether it is an individual or a corporation, in that the First Amendment protects speech. – not people/corporations.
I guess you pick your evils. Now corporations have free speech.
The downside is this decision has removed grass roots from the political process.
How difficult is it to understand that the First Amendment protects political speech — no matter who is speaking?
The upside is that the Constitution has been upheld and a clearly unconstitutional twenty year old law has been struck down.
It’s only a downer for those who want to sidestep and trash the Constitution. To those people I say: Drop dead, losers.
Ah, McCain-Feingold shot down finally, an much needed check to the unholy consequences of “bipartisanship.”
Thankfully both cosponsors are up for a tough primary challenge this year. Personally, I think McCain is toast as his wife judt put out a pro-gay marriage hitpiece (a middle finger to the citizens of the State of Arizona) and the only Dem announced is a milquetoast wimp.
What the First Amendment states is that congress shall make no law… abridging free speech. At the time of its writing, as I believe it is still so, the 1st Amendment stated that on this earth there is a country where free speech is allowed. It does not parse who or what but simply that congress shall pass no law abridging free speech. It does not say individuals have free speech, eligible voters or landowners, but rather there shall NOT be law passed restricting speech. The federal congress most certainly did pass laws restricting speech and it is high time that congress be set right.
I heard a rumor that there’s a bill by one of the liberal critters that proposes to take away filibusters as an option of debate.
You run down why the Koran? Your fear from the Allah.You are fuel in the hell. AMIN,AMIN
Allah will send misfortune to you
You’re in the wrong thread, you ignorant, woman-hating, goat-loving, Sharia loving idiot.
I think you’re looking for this thread on flushing a Koran down the toilet.
Oh gosh.
Not again.
Not with all the ‘ha-la-la’ and ‘Allah’ stuff.
Please, take your cultist crap somewhere else, please?
It’s hurting the women (and the kids).
-Sad