Supreme Court overturns Campaign Spending Limits on Corporations

[DynamiteRave]

Surprised no one made a thread about this.

Supreme Court Overturns Campaign Spending Limits on Corporations - ABC News

[saden1]

No one cared then and no one cares now. Balls and Strikes indeed.

[Trample the Elderly]

Free speech isn't just for the poor.

[djnemo65]

Yeah, as bad as I think this is for the country the legal reasoning behind it is sound imo. Besides, it's not like corporations aren't already running the show.

[Beemnseven]

Never in my life have I heard so many people upset over a victory for free speech.

[Longtimefan]

In so doing, the Supreme Court is essentially saying cooperations are the same as citizens therefore afforded the same rights. Many Americans were looking for this to be a part of the "change" which was a much talked about portion of Mr. Obama's campaign platform.

Cooperations are an entity unto themselves and should not be afforded the same rights as private citizens in regards to campaign contributions. The ruling grants further leway to corrupt government. Everybody can buy favors except the people.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by Longtimefan

In so doing, the Supreme Court is essentially saying cooperations are the same as citizens therefore afforded the same rights. Many Americans were looking for this to be a part of the "change" which was a much talked about portion of Mr. Obama's campaign platform.

Cooperations are an entity unto themselves and should not be afforded the same rights as private citizens in regards to campaign contributions. The ruling grants further leway to corrupt government. Everybody can buy favors except the people.

What you need to do is read how this came about. It all came down to the goverment banning books durn elections. Even the lawers trying to defend the law had a hard time explaining how banning a book for its contents was not blocking free speech. I torn on this ruling because I'm sick of what goes on in DC but agree with the ruling.

Funny people are blaming the S court when we can just demand our politicians not take the money. Heck people can run on the platform of not taking corp. money. So what we are really ticked about is our politicians that are in the pocket of corps. and don't give a F about the people they say they represent.

[Trample the Elderly]

Originally Posted by Longtimefan

In so doing, the Supreme Court is essentially saying cooperations are the same as citizens therefore afforded the same rights. Many Americans were looking for this to be a part of the "change" which was a much talked about portion of Mr. Obama's campaign platform.

Cooperations are an entity unto themselves and should not be afforded the same rights as private citizens in regards to campaign contributions. The ruling grants further leway to corrupt government. Everybody can buy favors except the people.

There you go. You hit is on the head. When you incorporate many people have essentially one voice. Who are you to say who should and should not have a voice in the US? You may not agree with what's being said but to say they have no right to have their point of view voiced? What's the deal with that?

[tryfuhl]

well I can see why it was overturned but I can't say that I embrace it much

at least the money will show up directly instead of through other channeling though