Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 66

Thread: 22 states, including Kentucky, join campaign finance fight

  1. #31
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

    Re: 22 states, including Kentucky, join campaign finance fight

    Quote Originally Posted by DiAnna View Post
    Since large campaign contributions are expected to buy future favors and access to various politicians, to me it's nothing short of legalized bribery.

    Until private funding is completely removed, replaced by governmental campaign dollars that are split equally among all candidates, only the rich and powerful will be able to afford public office. California was nearly saddled with a governor who literally used her own millions to try and purchase the office of governor. People who would be excellent public servents in state and federal legislatures are unable to run for those offices because they don't have million-dollar warchests until they find a benefactor who will finance them in return for future favors.

    As long as people and corporations can buy congress, corruption will continue to run rampant, and congress will represent their interests over the interests of the people and the nation as a whole.
    Dang, I have to agree with you 100%.
    "The necessaries of life occasion the great expense of the poor. They find it difficult to get food, and the greater part of their little revenue is spent in getting it. The luxuries and vanities of life occasion the principal expense of the rich, and a magnificent house embellishes and sets off to the best advantage all the other luxuries and vanities which they possess. ... It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion."

    -- Adam Smith

  2. #32
    Dungeon Master
    Hooter Babe

    DiAnna's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Northern California
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    32,586
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: 22 states, including Kentucky, join campaign finance fight

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    Dang, I have to agree with you 100%.
    Hurts, doesn't it!

  3. #33
    Sage

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Texas, Vegas, Colombia
    Last Seen
    11-28-16 @ 06:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    20,295

    Re: 22 states, including Kentucky, join campaign finance fight

    States can't ban or limit electioneering speech or spending by private parties....

    they can limit direct campaign contributions though.

  4. #34
    Sometimes wrong

    ttwtt78640's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Uhland, Texas
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:04 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    34,544

    Re: 22 states, including Kentucky, join campaign finance fight

    Quote Originally Posted by muciti View Post
    Can you show me where it says you have the right to use money to influence candidates and voting?
    The 1st amendment to our constitution. Media exposure costs money, travel costs money and producing ads, banners and signs costs money. If you are only free to speak on your porch or on a free blog then you are not really going to "get that word out" very effectively. If you are limitted in giving to a challenger, yet the incumbent is free to travel, speak and get 'news' exposure (all on the public dime) then you need some serious financial help just to have a fighting chance to compete with that, much less the additional 'private' campaign funds that the incumbent can raise too.
    “The reasonable man adapts himself to the world: the unreasonable one persists to adapt the world to himself.
    Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.” ― George Bernard Shaw, Man and Superman

  5. #35
    Sometimes wrong

    ttwtt78640's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Uhland, Texas
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:04 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    34,544

    Re: 22 states, including Kentucky, join campaign finance fight

    Quote Originally Posted by Thrilla View Post
    States can't ban or limit electioneering speech or spending by private parties....

    they can limit direct campaign contributions though.
    How can a state limit them?
    “The reasonable man adapts himself to the world: the unreasonable one persists to adapt the world to himself.
    Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.” ― George Bernard Shaw, Man and Superman

  6. #36
    Sometimes wrong

    ttwtt78640's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Uhland, Texas
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:04 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    34,544

    Re: 22 states, including Kentucky, join campaign finance fight

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    Dang, I have to agree with you 100%.
    Nonsense. That gives a HUGE advantage to the incumbent, as they may speak, travel and get on the 'news' using taxpayer money, as we see Obama do daily. Just how is that "fair"? Also to get started requires HUGE amounts of money, just to get petition signatures to QUALIFY for public campaign aid. If I can get public money just for SAYING that I want to run, I would take that in a heartbeat, as would 99% of the homeless. Think, before you drink, even koolaid.
    “The reasonable man adapts himself to the world: the unreasonable one persists to adapt the world to himself.
    Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.” ― George Bernard Shaw, Man and Superman

  7. #37
    Professor
    Sig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Last Seen
    11-29-13 @ 11:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    2,179

    Re: 22 states, including Kentucky, join campaign finance fight

    Quote Originally Posted by Aberration View Post
    Let me know when you have to pay for it.
    This is your notice.
    It's like you're dreaming of Gorgonzola when it's clearly Brie time, baby. Step into my office.

  8. #38
    Sage

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Texas, Vegas, Colombia
    Last Seen
    11-28-16 @ 06:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    20,295

    Re: 22 states, including Kentucky, join campaign finance fight

    Quote Originally Posted by ttwtt78640 View Post
    How can a state limit them?
    same way the federal government can.
    ( there is a public interest in mitigating quid pro quo behavior, which is why limits can be imposed on campaign donations.)


    keep in mind that they can only limit direct campaign contributions... not electioneering speech/spending.

  9. #39
    Professor
    Sig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Last Seen
    11-29-13 @ 11:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    2,179

    Re: 22 states, including Kentucky, join campaign finance fight

    Quote Originally Posted by jamesrage View Post
    If money is considered speech then these states have absolutly no busniss trying to restrict the 'speech' of anyone. Corporations just like NRA,GOA, planned parenthood, churches,unions, GLAAD and other group are an assembly of persons.That assembly of people are entitled to their other constitutional rights ,just like a church, unions, GLAAD, NRA, GOA, or any other group of people are entitled to exercise their other constitutional rights. Last I checked there is no one at a time clause in the first amendment or in the bill rights. Lib-tards seem to fail to understand that fact and the fact that corporations are groups of individuals and as a group of individuals they don't lose their rights.

    The SC never said WalMart is a person, nor did they say banks are people. That is stupid BS invited by lib-tards because they can no longer restrict the rights that group.

    Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    "If the First Amendment has any force, it prohibits Congress from fining or jailing citizens, or associations of citizens, for simply engaging in political speech."

    Justice Kennedy's opinion for the majority also noted that since the First Amendment (and the Court) do not distinguish between media and other corporations, these restrictions would allow Congress to suppress political speech in newspapers, books, television and blogs.[2]

    snip..

    The majority argued that the First Amendment must protect speakers with equal vigor and that the First Amendment does not tolerate prohibitions of speech based on the identity of the speaker. Because corporations are groups of individuals, the corporate form must receive the same free speech privileges as individual citizens. Likewise, the majority argued that independent expenditures are a form of speech, and limiting a corporation's ability to spend money also limits its ability to speak.
    What in the world are you talking about? Do you even know?

    WAKE UP CALL:

    Regardless of whether you're a corporation or an actual flesh and blood human being, when political influence is determined by the largesse of one's bank roll instead of the sagacity of one's ideas, freedom of speech loses all value.
    It's like you're dreaming of Gorgonzola when it's clearly Brie time, baby. Step into my office.

  10. #40
    Sage
    jamesrage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A place where common sense exists
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    31,067

    Re: 22 states, including Kentucky, join campaign finance fight

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    Where in the Constitution does it say that corporations are people?

    Corporations are an assembly of people,something the 1st amendment says you have a right to do. The right of the people peaceably to assemble is a constitutional right.

    Or that the enumerated rights apply to organizations, as opposed to individuals?
    They apply to both because individuals make up groups and individuals can make up groups. Your rights do not disappear just because you form a group nor do they disappear just because you choose not to be part of a group.

    Doesn't it seem odd to you that a corporation would have the right to spend tens of millions of dollars to influence many thousands of votes, but not have the right to vote itself?
    Those people in that corporation can vote in their designated polling places.

    We're in one of the places where you have to stand back and say, "wait a minute ... this **** doesn't make sense."
    No were not. You choose to ignore facts.When you ignore facts of course you can say "wait a minute this **** doesn't make sense". The fact is corporations are a peaceful assembly of people. As a peaceful assembly of people they can pool their money together to buy ads, make campaign contributions and so on just like any other group of people can.
    "A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murder is less to fear"

    Cicero Marcus Tullius

Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •