Page 1 of 5 1234 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 9 of 38

Thread: Activist Supreme Court spits on Democracy

  1. #1

  2. #2

    Default Re: Activist Supreme Court spits on Democracy

    As an avid voter, I couldn't care less about who donated what to whose campaign. I look at how the candidate feels on issues. But, I also know that a lot of voters are swayed by commercials and a lot of politicians are on the take with special intrest groups. I don't like this decision. But I did get a list of Obama's biggest contributers to his campaign and noticed that banks were right up there in contributions, so I don't really understand his "outrage".

    Ultimately, this will just make me even more sick of political ads, phone calls and junk mail.

  3. #3
    Olympic Champ
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Parker, Az
    Posts
    3,388

    Default Re: Activist Supreme Court spits on Democracy

    Freedom of speach is a big issue in this country. I agree with the SCOTUS here. As usual for the most contentious, or close cases, there is only one vote that counts and that is Kennedy's.
    I am 49, bald, ugly, and don't own a single cool thing. Kids like me though.

  4. #4

    Default Re: Activist Supreme Court spits on Democracy

    Obama was outraged?
    DSCH: a Soviet artist's reply to unjust criticism.

  5. #5
    Olympic Champ RYou's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    8,376

    Default Re: Activist Supreme Court spits on Democracy

    Interesting. Our new Gov here in NJ took office on Tuesday. On Wednesday one of his first Executive Orders blocks campaign contributions from unions to politicians. The Democrats have already promised to have the order overturned.
    Life's not the breaths you take, the breathing in and out that gets you through the day ain't what it's all about. It's the moments that take your breath away.

  6. #6
    World Champ ODH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    New Hampshire
    Posts
    3,962

    Default Re: Activist Supreme Court spits on Democracy

    Quote Originally Posted by RYou View Post
    Interesting. Our new Gov here in NJ took office on Tuesday. On Wednesday one of his first Executive Orders blocks campaign contributions from unions to politicians. The Democrats have already promised to have the order overturned.
    Sounds like the Supremem Court just overturned it.

  7. #7

    Default Re: Activist Supreme Court spits on Democracy

    Negative. Campaign contributions directly to politicians wasn't part of this supreme court ruling as I understand it.

    I think this ruling was about spending money in other ways: buying commercial time that would benefit a candidate for instance, which is not the same as directly giving money to said candidate.

    The argument can be made that it is a distinction without a pratical difference. I'm guessing the four dissenting judges may have held that view.

    I have mixed feelings. I decry the principle of holding forth corporations as the same as individuals. I also decry the political muscle of large corporations. The financial lobby has been DESTRUCTIVE to our economic well being (in my opinion only).

    So I agree with the existing laws, found here and there, restricting corporate contributions to candidates. But, I'm not sure about not allowing these organizations to buy commercial time for political purposes. Seems like a slippery slope.
    DSCH: a Soviet artist's reply to unjust criticism.

  8. #8
    Olympic Champ RYou's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    8,376

    Default Re: Activist Supreme Court spits on Democracy

    Quote Originally Posted by LkwdSteve View Post
    Negative. Campaign contributions directly to politicians wasn't part of this supreme court ruling as I understand it.

    I think this ruling was about spending money in other ways: buying commercial time that would benefit a candidate for instance, which is not the same as directly giving money to said candidate.

    The argument can be made that it is a distinction without a pratical difference. I'm guessing the four dissenting judges may have held that view.

    I have mixed feelings. I decry the principle of holding forth corporations as the same as individuals. I also decry the political muscle of large corporations. The financial lobby has been DESTRUCTIVE to our economic well being (in my opinion only).

    So I agree with the existing laws, found here and there, restricting corporate contributions to candidates. But, I'm not sure about not allowing these organizations to buy commercial time for political purposes. Seems like a slippery slope.
    They just squashed the unions from buying air time to tout their messages. Interestingly, here in NJ one "local" was touting one candidate while another "local" was for the opposition. Same union, two separate locals opposed to each other. Both were state labor unions.
    Life's not the breaths you take, the breathing in and out that gets you through the day ain't what it's all about. It's the moments that take your breath away.

  9. #9

    Default Re: Activist Supreme Court spits on Democracy

    "They just squashed the unions from buying air time to tout their messages."

    Now, that is exactly what the supreme court addressed. So the New Jersey governor's executive order is kaput in that respect and Jersey democrats need only point that out (I guess).

    Central to the question is whether spending money equals constitutionally protected free speech. Money = speech?

    Is it true that a senator called for Congressional hearings after the decision came down yesterday?
    DSCH: a Soviet artist's reply to unjust criticism.

Posting Permissions

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