Supreme Court Rejects Campaign Spending Limits

[Sihouette]

I meant impeachment with respect to SCOTUS.

I find it amazing that you lefties are so against free speech. I mean wow, just wow ~clone

Not at all. Not for citizens. Any corporate "citizen" whose influential-body includes people not born or naturalized to this country doesn't pass the test for citizen per the 14th Amendment.

You know that. You know that foreigners may not influence our elections directly as was awarded by SCOTUS just days ago. It's OK, just admit it. You know that the Constitution and all Amendments within it were written for US citizens alone, including the 1st Amendment. You know a dead argument when you're trying to cover for it. How embarassed I feel for you..

 

[dogtowner]

I meant impeachment with respect to SCOTUS.


Not at all. Not for citizens. Any corporate "citizen" whose influential-body includes people not born or naturalized to this country doesn't pass the test for citizen per the 14th Amendment.

You know that. You know that foreigners may not influence our elections directly as was awarded by SCOTUS just days ago. It's OK, just admit it. You know that the Constitution and all Amendments within it were written for US citizens alone, including the 1st Amendment. You know a dead argument when you're trying to cover for it. How embarassed I feel for you..

OK, so all Constitutional rights to you need only apply to citizens. Fair enough.

So no more Miranda for non-citizens, trials welfare or anything else. Hell we can just shoot them willy nilly !

And those poor pitiful enemy combatants ? Just shoot them too.

Illegal search and seizure, religious protection, all gone.

You really need to think this stuff through.

Or take an even scarier tack, make cash not equal free speech !
No more PACs, 527's any of that. Why not really make a real statement about eliminating special interests ? Why not no money in elections at all ?

 

[GenSeneca]

You know that foreigners may not influence our elections directly as was awarded by SCOTUS just days ago.

Are you hoping that if you tell the same lie often enough it will become true?

Foreign Corporations Donating?

The president claimed that "foreign corporations" could begin spending big money to influence U.S. elections under a recent Supreme Court decision.

Obama: Last week the Supreme Court reversed a century of law that I believe will open the floodgates for special interests –- including foreign corporations –- to spend without limit in our elections.

Justice Samuel Alito, who with the other justices sat at the very front of the chamber last night, was seen shaking his head and mouthing what appeared to be the words "not true" as Obama said this. Alito joined the majority in the 5-4 Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission decision issued by the Court last week, which knocked down restrictions on corporate spending on elections.

But it’s unclear whether the court’s opinion will lead to allowing foreign-based corporations to buy campaign ads and engage in other electioneering activities. There is still a law barring foreign corporations from spending money in connection with U.S. elections (see 2 U.S.C. 441e(b)(3)), and that’s a matter likely to be litigated further. The court’s most recent decision explicitly didn’t deal with that question. But strictly speaking, Obama couched his claim as something "I believe," making it a statement of opinion and not of fact. So whether his view turns out to be right remains to be seen.

 

[dogtowner]

Are you hoping that if you tell the same lie often enough it will become true?

its the silver bullet they didn't see coming...
the garlic thrown round their necks..
the kryptonite that was dropped down their pants...
the bucket of water that melts their money advantage...

and yes, libs are totally sold on the tell a lie often enough theory.

 

[samsara15]

George Bush packed the courts with Right Wing extremists. Down the road, America will see more and more of their basic civil liberties disappear.

 

[Sihouette]

I totally agree with samsara given our modern means of speaking [via the media] that the SCOTUS ruling casts a "fiscal free-speech shadow" over less fortunate, effectively abridging their rights to their own free speech. And as #14 tells us, that's a no-no.

The real issue that will bear teeth is that corporations do not meet the litmus test as citizens, no matter who decided what, when. Congress has the power, specifically mandated in #14 to enforce its provisions. Again, this was undoubtedly included so that a stacked court like the one today wouldn't provide conditions wherein 5 mere people who are lifetime appointees and ergo unaccountable after swearing in to the rest of the population, could adversely affect the lives of millions with one fell swoop. In order to be a citizen via the specific language of #14, you have to be BORN in the US or NATURALIZED here AND [not "or"..very important distinction] subject to the laws and regulations herein. A corporate "body" of its citizenhood includes all members of its body that affect its decisions. If ANY part of them are of foreign origin, they may not be citizens subject to all the luxuries therein.

Nevermind the fact that we're at war and this poses an enhanced threat to our national security. Nevermind that along with all the luxuries, personal accountability [also a quality of citizenship] of individuals who may act badly or illegally that results in harm to the US, essentially are cushioned from direct accountability.

There are so many things Constitutionally wrong with the recent SCOTUS decision and the one assigning citizenship to corporations from which it derives its precident, that one hardly knows where to begin...but I think a good team of lawyers will get it sorted out. It at once revokes Amendment 14, adulterates Amendment 1 and nullifies Amendment 9 by attempting to assign supremacy of #1 over #14. And from memory, I'm pretty sure this qualifies as Judicial overreach and may be subject to punitive action by Congress at their descretion. Particularly as it is assigned via #14.

 

[Sihouette]

So no more Miranda for non-citizens, trials welfare or anything else. Hell we can just shoot them willy nilly~dog

No because that would jeopardize our troops and the sitting President and Congress must act in appropriate ways to protect their wellbeing while abroad. It follows logically that shooting foreigners at whim would render our citizens subject to the same treatment. We act on our values with foreigners because it could actually harm our citizens and troops if we didn't.

Your extremism is entertaining though. It does not nullify that foreign inroads into the very heart of our democracy, the electoral process, especially during time of war is a direct threat to our national security. The President and Congress are mandated to act in that interest above all. It is a macro-issue. Yours is a micro-issue.

 

[dogtowner]

No because that would jeopardize our troops and the sitting President and Congress must act in appropriate ways to protect their wellbeing while abroad. It follows logically that shooting foreigners at whim would render our citizens subject to the same treatment. We act on our values with foreigners because it could actually harm our citizens and troops if we didn't.

Your extremism is entertaining though. It does not nullify that foreign inroads into the very heart of our democracy, the electoral process, especially during time of war is a direct threat to our national security. The President and Congress are mandated to act in that interest above all. It is a macro-issue. Yours is a micro-issue.

Well, you really need to make up your mind. Either Constitutional protections apply to all or only citizens. So its extreme to point out to you the impact of your statements then ? So be it.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Freedom of speech in the U. S. Constitution means freedom of speech & corporations have as much right to spend their money on candidates they support or oppose as anybody else. Campaign finance reform is a joke & a fraud anyway, it's all about stopping freedom of speech & McCain & Feingold were more stoned than Cheech & Chong doing this bill. The Supreme court is correct in their decision, anyone can participate in elections & the Constitution is saved.

Buying Spree Nets China Stakes in Top U.$. Firm$​

"Flush with cash despite the global economic downturn, China’s sovereign wealth fund quietly snapped up more than $9 billion worth of shares last year in some of the bigge$t American corporation$, including Morgan Stanley, Bank of America and Citigroup.

Although most of the stakes were small, China Investment Corp., the government’s $300 billion investment fund, now owns stock in some of the best-known American brands, including Apple, Coca-Cola, Johnson & Johnson, Motorola and Visa, David Barboza and Keith Bradsher report in The New York Times."

Good thinkin', there, Free Speechers.

​

 

[Sihouette]

Don't forget the Saudi Prince who owns Citibank and Fox News. I'm sure the islamic wealthy elite and red China will play fair in vetting candidates appropriate to represent US citizens in the next election cycle. Team-Obama has become deaf on this one. Are they going to roll over and piss on themselves about this one too?

Sure haven't heard much about it since Obama admonished the Justices at the SOTU address.???

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Team-Obama has become deaf on this one. Are they going to roll over and piss on themselves about this one too?

Sure haven't heard much about it since Obama admonished the Justices at the SOTU address.???

What....you think he can legally override the Supreme Court?????

​