• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Supreme Court Overturns Limits on Corporate Spending in Political Campaigns

Politics and business have been part of each other ever since the birth of this nation, and way before that even.

I think limiting the money that corporations can give to politicians was a good idea, in theory and in principle. But in practice, the result was the corporations and politicians becoming more shady about campaign funds and campaign platforms.

If raising that limit can provide more transparency, I think it may be worth it. It may be a compromise in principle, but in practice I think we may be better off.

I never thought of it that way. Maybe it will. I just dislike business and politics being in bed with one another.

Maybe ... I just do not trust business ... or the government to be honest.
 
Like the Obama supporter that ran Fannie Mae that made $90 million in half a decade?

Yeah ... I do not deny that I do not like that.

That to is corruption. I do not like that either.

Shameful bunch of sellouts.
 
Re: Supreme Court ruling a landmark for corporate political cash

This is the greatest case of SCOTUS incompetence I have ever seen.
Disagreed. The McCain-Feingold bill was an atrocity that richly deserves to be tossed in the trash.

A much better approach is to promptly (like within 24 hours) report on the internet where the money is coming from. Sunshine is a much better disinfectant than regulation because there are always lawyers who can figure out how to game the system.

Just my opinion.
 
And death to US democracy. So when is the new Senator for Bank of America going to take his seat?
What are you talking about? :doh
 
In some ways, I can see this as a good thing, but in other ways I can't see it as a good thing.


For one, it will lead to more corruption in the system we already have. However, if what Lightdemon is correct it could lead to less corruption I see it as a positive thing
 
However, the USSC has so far refused to throw out essential elements of McCain-Feingold that are CLEAR violations of the First Amendment.

NO political committee or candidate should have the power to sue ANYONE who will be airing a documentary to prevent the airing of that documentary.

Prior Restraint on the First Amendment? Excuse me?
 
In some ways, I can see this as a good thing, but in other ways I can't see it as a good thing.


For one, it will lead to more corruption in the system we already have. However, if what Lightdemon is correct it could lead to less corruption I see it as a positive thing

Personally, any law that would jail me from spending my own money to promote a candidate I believed in, while letting big rich groups with the resources to seet up the right "fronts" to get around the law...

That's corruption.

PeteEU shows once again his absolutely lack of understanding what was really going on. As Right pointed out, getting around the McCain-Feingold law was a matter of playing the system.

And that system favored big money and special interests and denied the right to free speech for anyone/group that lacked the resources. If you realize this reality, you see the SCOTUS just dealt a blow to elitism... Which is probably why he is so upset.
 
And death to US democracy. So when is the new Senator for Bank of America going to take his seat?


I don,t know;whenever Brown gets the clearance,Kinda looks like sometime in February.:2wave:
 
Basic freedom makes this a just ruling.

I just wish the voting populace was interested enough not to be swayed by glitz and flash that money helps provide.

Still, I'd rather have this stuff out in the open, rather than under the table. This ruling changes nothing other than perhaps that.
 
Re: Supreme Court ruling a landmark for corporate political cash

I agree in the sense that immoral people will always find loopholes in the law. Without fully funded public campaign financing, the corruption will never be excised from the system.
 
Re: Supreme Court ruling a landmark for corporate political cash

Supreme Court ruling a landmark for corporate political cash

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Corporations can spend freely to support or oppose candidates for president and Congress, the Supreme Court ruled on Thursday in a landmark decision that allows massive sums to be spent to influence future elections.

The 5-4 ruling split the high court along conservative and liberal lines. It was a defeat for the Obama administration and supporters of campaign finance laws who said that ending the limits would unleash a flood of corporate money into the political system.

This is the greatest case of SCOTUS incompetence I have ever seen.

Lets all give the cluess assholes who voted to alllow the corporate buyoff of the government a big hand. The justices responsible for voting "yes" on this issue (probably republicans) needs to be removed from office.

This country just lost key liberty and no longer has free and fair elections.

The SCOTUS ... what a bunch of ****ing imbeciles.

Do you have any consistent political philosophy of any kind?
 
Re: Supreme Court ruling a landmark for corporate political cash

I agree in the sense that immoral people will always find loopholes in the law. Without fully funded public campaign financing, the corruption will never be excised from the system.
I have to disagree there, too. Corruption is a problem wherever public money is spent, and for that reason public money should never be used to fund political campaigns.
 
I don,t know;whenever Brown gets the clearance,Kinda looks like sometime in February.:2wave:

Burns your ass the dems lost Massachusetts, doesn't it. :lamo Best buy asbestos knickers before November, you're gunna need them.
 
Re: Supreme Court ruling a landmark for corporate political cash

Do you have any consistent political philosophy of any kind?

Yes. He's a hard core liberal masquerading as a centrist.

This is good news that the government cannot stop companies from their right to free speech.
 
And death to US democracy. So when is the new Senator for Bank of America going to take his seat?

Do you have anything other than raging ignorance to show for yourself?

Who was the "Senator for Bank of America" before McCain-Feingold?

Not that you have even the slightest notion of what all was struck down IN McCain-Feingold, or that you even care. You simply want to bash the United States yet again.
 
Burns your ass the dems lost Massachusetts, doesn't it. :lamo Best buy asbestos knickers before November, you're gunna need them.

I wish that we had a smiley from another forum that we know about,you would be getting a double shot of read between the line about now insted of this one. :2wave::2wave:
 
I wish that we had a smiley from another forum that we know about,you would be getting a double shot of read between the line about now insted of this one. :2wave::2wave:

You mean the one that tells the other person they are #1 in an easily interpreted one handed gesture?... thought that would be your reaction. :mrgreen:
 
This is great news indeed. This means if Palin runs for Pres the Oil Companies can endorse her and donate big to her campaign which I will support and donate to. The 1st Ammendment prevails. Now if the SCOTUS would enforce Article 2 Sec 1 Clause 5 of the Constitution requiring you have to be a Natural Born Citizen to be President reflecting on the usurper Obama, everything would be ok.
 
You mean the one that tells the other person they are #1 in an easily interpreted one handed gesture?... thought that would be your reaction. :mrgreen:

I believe this time it warrants a two hand salute. :mrgreen:
 
In the old system, there was a law against it. Those who got caught went to prison (where they belong).

Now... there is no danger.

I do not like that.

A law against what? What exactly will happen under the new system that didn't happen under the old. Be specific here.
 
And death to US democracy. So when is the new Senator for Bank of America going to take his seat?

It already happens. The major thing that McCain-Feingold ended up doing was restricting the People from participating. Big corporations and lobbyists already taint the system. There's a reason for the Wallstreet and banking bailouts at the expense of the People....we already have the Senator for Bank of America.
 
Back
Top Bottom