Page 17 of 105 FirstFirst ... 715161718192767 ... LastLast
Results 161 to 170 of 1049

Thread: Supreme Court Overturns Limits on Corporate Spending in Political Campaigns

  1. #161
    Sage
    Navy Pride's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Pacific NW
    Last Seen
    05-07-15 @ 02:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    39,883

    Re: Supreme Court eases restrictions on corporate campaign spending

    I love to watch you liberals whine when the playing field is leveled..We have watched the unions and the DOE line the pockets of democrats for years.....Now we can watch the corporations that actually do the hiring in this country line the pockets of the Republicans.......Remember my left wing friends, what goes around come around............
    "God Bless Our Troops in Harms Way."

  2. #162
    Professor
    Cassandra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Maine
    Last Seen
    11-02-17 @ 02:39 AM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    1,319

    Re: Supreme Court eases restrictions on corporate campaign spending

    Quote Originally Posted by Areopagitican View Post
    I'm fairly certain the Constitution protects "inalienable rights," but hey; I could be wrong. The rights, in turn, do protect individuals from government overreach. But there's a large distinction between a document which aims to protect "the people," and one that aim to protect liberty.



    Aren't they merely a group of people?
    The founding fathers would not have agreed with that sentiment. The Boston Tea Party was an anti-corporate sentiment as much as anything. Reminds me of the controversy surrounding the re-importation of drugs. The whole notion of corporate personhood defies common sense.


    Of course not. But being able to express yourself politically is one of the essential ones, right? It makes no sense to negate certain rights merely because they are being used by many people on a large scale.
    When were rights ever negated? They could not INDIVIDUALLY vote or speak or write letters or contribute money to a candidate in the past??

  3. #163
    User Queen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Last Seen
    05-26-10 @ 02:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    98

    Re: Supreme Court eases restrictions on corporate campaign spending

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    Yes, amazingly, there no corporations anywhere owned and run by either dolphins or robots.
    I wonder how you'll feel about this when Citgo, owned by Venezuela, pays for a Senator to do their bidding?

    I wonder how you'll feel when a Saudi Arabian or a Japanese or an Iranian corporation pays for a politician to vote the way they want them to.

    This ruling takes away the voice of the people of the USA and gives the power to any corporation in the world who feels like buying a US politician.

    Hello major corruption.
    Enough with the dirty, deadly and disgusting oil and coal. Let's get clean, let's go green. Enough is enough!!

  4. #164
    User Queen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Last Seen
    05-26-10 @ 02:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    98

    Re: Supreme Court eases restrictions on corporate campaign spending

    Quote Originally Posted by Cassandra View Post
    Yes. I.M.O., this is a catastrophe for democracy. It is simply hard to believe that any self-described "conservative' can call this a victory for free speech.
    Apparently they are just parroting what the corporation News Corp (FOX) is telling them to think. They are being told this is a free speech issue.

    But this isn't a free speech issue. This is a campaign finance issue. And now there are no limits to funding a candidate.
    Enough with the dirty, deadly and disgusting oil and coal. Let's get clean, let's go green. Enough is enough!!

  5. #165
    User Queen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Last Seen
    05-26-10 @ 02:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    98

    Re: Supreme Court eases restrictions on corporate campaign spending

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    I am not going to do your work for you.......Lets just say this ruling levels the playing field when it comes to contributions to a candidate..............If your not smart enough to figure that out its on you..........
    How does it level the playing field?

    If a corporation pays candidate A a billion dollars to run for office, how does candidate B match that funding for advertising his campaign?

    How does a candidate of the people run against a candidate of the corporation?
    Enough with the dirty, deadly and disgusting oil and coal. Let's get clean, let's go green. Enough is enough!!

  6. #166
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    University of San Diego
    Last Seen
    04-14-11 @ 02:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    672
    Blog Entries
    3

    Re: Supreme Court eases restrictions on corporate campaign spending

    Quote Originally Posted by Queen View Post
    Really? Who are you claiming said it first?
    Government in America: People, Politics, and Policy (Twelfth Edition); ISBN # 0-321-29236-7

    Quote Originally Posted by Groucho View Post
    A corporation is a legal entity that is answerable to stockholders and a bottom line and may not even be held by Americans.
    Couldn't you say "answerable to participants and a bottom line," with regards to, well, every association? What makes a corporation so deserving of punishment?


    I dunno, I just can't understand how a fictional creation can ever be considered a "person" -- especially one that can be taken over by another fictional creation, dissolved, reorganized, and formed into a monopoly.
    No one is arguing over whether a corporation is a person, it's not. It's a piece of paper. But what matters is whether or not liberties endowed to individuals become invalid once they group together and can rival the scope of government.

    I'd be willing to bet that Benjamin Franklin didn't consider his printing press business a "person."
    Under the act, The Federalist Papers would never have been written. Consider that nugget of irony for a moment.

    There was not a need then; campaigns were cheaper, businesses mostly stayed out of it (at first), and there were no huge corporations of the kind that later developed.
    "Expensive" campaigns and influence peddling are not indicative of more corrupt corporations. But of a more corrupt government.

    We need a Teddy Roosevelt populist now.
    The only trust he would seek to bust would be the US Federal Government. IMO

    I was referring to our laws, passed by our elected representatives, which is the "will of the people" is it not?
    I'm branching off in a unique direction, but bear with me.

    Take the first instance of restricting corporate donations. How could it be the will of the people to pass a law when corporations can donate as much as they want? Is that not the definition of the argument? But certainly, the law could not have prevented corporations donating before the law was signed. So was the law which you see as the "people's will," not their will at all?
    Last edited by Areopagitican; 01-22-10 at 12:42 AM.

  7. #167
    User Queen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Last Seen
    05-26-10 @ 02:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    98

    Re: Supreme Court eases restrictions on corporate campaign spending

    Quote Originally Posted by TacticalEvilDan View Post
    Heh, welcome to the last 100 years.
    103 years ago congress passed a law that prevented corporations from buying candidates.

    You think our politicians were bought and paid for before?

    The days are gone where you'll see any candidate like Ron Paul ever again. No corporation is going to back him. He's not a corporate shill.
    Enough with the dirty, deadly and disgusting oil and coal. Let's get clean, let's go green. Enough is enough!!

  8. #168
    User Queen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Last Seen
    05-26-10 @ 02:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    98

    Re: Supreme Court eases restrictions on corporate campaign spending

    Quote Originally Posted by Harshaw View Post
    Siiiiiiigh.

    Exactly like it all was before 2002, right?

    You people say this like it's a century-old law and now that it's gone, it's a new frontier.
    1907 is a century ago, yes. That's when the law was written that's been overturned by this ruling.

    This effort to bring about more comprehensive campaign finance reform began in 1907 when Congress passed the Tillman Act, which prohibited corporations and national banks from contributing money to Federal campaigns. The first Federal campaign disclosure legislation was a 1910 law affecting House elections only. In 1911, the law was amended to cover Senate elections as well, and to set spending limits for all Congressional candidates.
    Appendix 4: Brief History
    Enough with the dirty, deadly and disgusting oil and coal. Let's get clean, let's go green. Enough is enough!!

  9. #169
    Sage
    EnigmaO01's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Indiana
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 12:41 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    7,027

    Re: Supreme Court eases restrictions on corporate campaign spending

    Quote Originally Posted by Groucho View Post
    But that would mean they used judicial activism, and we all know that judges only use judicial activism when they make decisions that liberals agree with!!!
    As a attorney Groucho what do you think of this decision?

    Edit: Sorry I see you've answered that as I went farther in the thread.
    Last edited by EnigmaO01; 01-22-10 at 12:52 AM.

  10. #170
    User Queen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Last Seen
    05-26-10 @ 02:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    98

    Re: Supreme Court eases restrictions on corporate campaign spending

    Quote Originally Posted by Coronado View Post
    This already happens. It happened before CFR. It happened after CFR. The one and only way to stop this is to reduce the size and scope of government, but since neither left nor right are interested in this, you might as well get used to the concept of your government being in the pocket of the people with the most money.

    Seriously, wake the **** up. There's nothing new about any of this.
    You're wrong. This is new. It's a new ruling by the supreme court that undid the 1907 law and now there are no limits at all on how much money a corporation can spend buying a candidate for themselves.

    Any politician in office right now can be told by a corporation if they don't vote the right way, the corporation will buy one to replace him, who will vote the right way.
    Enough with the dirty, deadly and disgusting oil and coal. Let's get clean, let's go green. Enough is enough!!

Page 17 of 105 FirstFirst ... 715161718192767 ... 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
  •