Rooster DeWoo wrote:
Are you nuts? From ABC This Week question to Jim Demint:
MORAN: OK. And, finally, are you in favor of foreign corporations being able to participate in American elections through this decision?
DEMINT: I don't believe that — right now, foreigners cannot give to the political process. And I hope, as this thing is sorted out, that we'll make sure that this is an American focus, so we'll have to sort all that out. I hadn't read all the details of the court's decision.
You don't "believe" so, Jimmy? Well I've got news for you: That's not how it reads in the ruling. Fact is, there's zero distinction in the ruling between U.S. and foreign-controlled corporations, so any corporation with American interests (even if the largest stockholder is a foreigner, like from China, Venezuela or Saudi Arabia, for example) can now openly influence American elections. That sound like Founding Father material to you?
As Sen. Bob Menendez says: "The problem is, a corporation is a corporation is a corporation. And a foreign corporation is going to be able to spend their monies in determining who is elected to the United States Congress. That's not good for the average citizen."
What good comes from undoing 3 decades of campaign reform aimed at keeping our elections fom being bought and paid for by corporate interests. This has nothing to do with free speech. It has everything to do with undue corporate influence. At this point in our history it may not even matter much. The flipping between the two parties and their nutcase extremes amounts to nothing more that rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.
MORAN: OK. And, finally, are you in favor of foreign corporations being able to participate in American elections through this decision?
DEMINT: I don't believe that — right now, foreigners cannot give to the political process. And I hope, as this thing is sorted out, that we'll make sure that this is an American focus, so we'll have to sort all that out. I hadn't read all the details of the court's decision.
You don't "believe" so, Jimmy? Well I've got news for you: That's not how it reads in the ruling. Fact is, there's zero distinction in the ruling between U.S. and foreign-controlled corporations, so any corporation with American interests (even if the largest stockholder is a foreigner, like from China, Venezuela or Saudi Arabia, for example) can now openly influence American elections. That sound like Founding Father material to you?
As Sen. Bob Menendez says: "The problem is, a corporation is a corporation is a corporation. And a foreign corporation is going to be able to spend their monies in determining who is elected to the United States Congress. That's not good for the average citizen."
What good comes from undoing 3 decades of campaign reform aimed at keeping our elections fom being bought and paid for by corporate interests. This has nothing to do with free speech. It has everything to do with undue corporate influence. At this point in our history it may not even matter much. The flipping between the two parties and their nutcase extremes amounts to nothing more that rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.
Using 
Internet Explorer 8.0 on 
Windows XP
25 January 2010 20:18:38
Internet Explorer 8.0 on Windows XP25 January 2010 20:18:38
JT wrote:
Seems like only the democrats are
whining about our First Amendment rights.
They should try to cheer up, they can
always try to impose the "Fairness Doctrine"
whining about our First Amendment rights.
They should try to cheer up, they can
always try to impose the "Fairness Doctrine"
Using Internet Explorer 8.0 on Windows Vista
26 January 2010 12:47:02
Internet Explorer 8.0 on Windows Vista26 January 2010 12:47:02
HappyG wrote:
Right, JT. Obama has 10 lobbyists in his administration. Liberals are hypocrites! Somehow, I got on their mailing list, so here's an email I got from Paul Begala. They are getting nervous.
Do you hear that pop-pop-popping sound off in the distance?
The good news is, it ain't gunfire. The bad news is, it's corporate lobbyists and their Republican lapdogs popping champagne corks and dancing on what's left of the Constitution.
They're celebrating the Supreme Court's decision to allow giant corporations to spend unlimited amounts of money to target any member of Congress who dares cross them.
It's no exaggeration to say the very foundation of our democracy will be under attack once the tidal wave of corporate money floods into campaigns on the side of Republican candidates.
Now is no time to throw up your hands. In fact, I say it's time to throw a few elbows.
We will not accept this outrageous Supreme Court decision lying down. That's why I've committed to helping recruit 25,000 new grassroots Democratic members before President Obama's State of the Union Address Wednesday night.
Renew your 2010 Democratic membership from the DCCC at the special rate of $5 and show the world that Democrats support strong, immediate action to block powerful corporate lobbyists from hijacking our democracy.
More than 75% of the DCCC's revenue comes from grassroots supporters like you. So, your support is more important than ever. You're our only hope. We will never be able to match corporate America's billions.
Get this: for less then ten percent of Exxon's 2008 profits, it could spend $10 million on every congressional race in America.
And that's just ten percent of one company's profits for one year. Truly, the right-wing Supreme Court wants to put our Congress, our country, our very freedom on the auction block for the highest corporate bidder. And the far right wing of the Republican Party intends to be wielding the auctioneer's gavel.
The Court's radical decision, overturning decades of settled law going back to Teddy Roosevelt, held that corporations can draw unlimited amounts of money from their general treasuries and spend it on "issue ads" to attack any candidate who challenges them.
Renew your 2010 Democratic membership from the DCCC at the special rate of $5 and show the world that Democrats support strong, immediate action to block powerful corporate lobbyists from hijacking our democracy.
For example, imagine that AIG executives may now take some of the billions in tax-payer funded bailout funds they received and target with a torrent of attack ads any Democrat who challenges their obscene bonuses.
With absolutely no limit on their ability to spend money, oil companies, big insurance companies and powerful Wall Street banks will easily spend hundreds-of-millions of dollars trying to drown out the voices of the American people.
Make no mistake, our freedom is under fire. Thank goodness it's not from machine guns. But as we say in Texas, a lawyer with a pen can steal more in a minute than a criminal with a gun can steal in a lifetime.
But, we can fight back.
Renew your 2010 Democratic membership from the DCCC at the special rate of $5 and show the world that Democrats support strong, immediate action to block powerful corporate lobbyists from hijacking our democracy.
Thank you,
Paul Begala
P.S. We need to recruit 25,000 2010 members in the next 48 hours to show the world Democrats are standing up for middle class America against the powerful corporate lobbyists. Renew your 2010 membership today.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Do you hear that pop-pop-popping sound off in the distance?
The good news is, it ain't gunfire. The bad news is, it's corporate lobbyists and their Republican lapdogs popping champagne corks and dancing on what's left of the Constitution.
They're celebrating the Supreme Court's decision to allow giant corporations to spend unlimited amounts of money to target any member of Congress who dares cross them.
It's no exaggeration to say the very foundation of our democracy will be under attack once the tidal wave of corporate money floods into campaigns on the side of Republican candidates.
Now is no time to throw up your hands. In fact, I say it's time to throw a few elbows.
We will not accept this outrageous Supreme Court decision lying down. That's why I've committed to helping recruit 25,000 new grassroots Democratic members before President Obama's State of the Union Address Wednesday night.
Renew your 2010 Democratic membership from the DCCC at the special rate of $5 and show the world that Democrats support strong, immediate action to block powerful corporate lobbyists from hijacking our democracy.
More than 75% of the DCCC's revenue comes from grassroots supporters like you. So, your support is more important than ever. You're our only hope. We will never be able to match corporate America's billions.
Get this: for less then ten percent of Exxon's 2008 profits, it could spend $10 million on every congressional race in America.
And that's just ten percent of one company's profits for one year. Truly, the right-wing Supreme Court wants to put our Congress, our country, our very freedom on the auction block for the highest corporate bidder. And the far right wing of the Republican Party intends to be wielding the auctioneer's gavel.
The Court's radical decision, overturning decades of settled law going back to Teddy Roosevelt, held that corporations can draw unlimited amounts of money from their general treasuries and spend it on "issue ads" to attack any candidate who challenges them.
Renew your 2010 Democratic membership from the DCCC at the special rate of $5 and show the world that Democrats support strong, immediate action to block powerful corporate lobbyists from hijacking our democracy.
For example, imagine that AIG executives may now take some of the billions in tax-payer funded bailout funds they received and target with a torrent of attack ads any Democrat who challenges their obscene bonuses.
With absolutely no limit on their ability to spend money, oil companies, big insurance companies and powerful Wall Street banks will easily spend hundreds-of-millions of dollars trying to drown out the voices of the American people.
Make no mistake, our freedom is under fire. Thank goodness it's not from machine guns. But as we say in Texas, a lawyer with a pen can steal more in a minute than a criminal with a gun can steal in a lifetime.
But, we can fight back.
Renew your 2010 Democratic membership from the DCCC at the special rate of $5 and show the world that Democrats support strong, immediate action to block powerful corporate lobbyists from hijacking our democracy.
Thank you,
Paul Begala
P.S. We need to recruit 25,000 2010 members in the next 48 hours to show the world Democrats are standing up for middle class America against the powerful corporate lobbyists. Renew your 2010 membership today.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Using Internet Explorer 7.0 on Windows XP
26 January 2010 19:42:57
Internet Explorer 7.0 on Windows XP26 January 2010 19:42:57
RRamey6 wrote:
Foreign nationals financed the annointed one during his campaign, so what's the difference. Clinton sold America to China years ago, so what's the difference. Begala is a whore just like the rest of them...
Standing up for middle class america, amazing! these liberal hand wringing assholes destroyed the middle class.
One industry after another: steel, mining, oil, automobiles, banking, finance (not the same thing), real estate, aerospace, shipbuilding, chemical industry and next is medicine and insurance.
The only way they can become bigger fools is to gain weight..
Standing up for middle class america, amazing! these liberal hand wringing assholes destroyed the middle class.
One industry after another: steel, mining, oil, automobiles, banking, finance (not the same thing), real estate, aerospace, shipbuilding, chemical industry and next is medicine and insurance.
The only way they can become bigger fools is to gain weight..
Using Internet Explorer 8.0 on Windows XP
29 January 2010 20:56:11
Internet Explorer 8.0 on Windows XP29 January 2010 20:56:11
HappyG wrote:
Right, Ramey! Nearly everything Obama objects to, is happening in his administration and democratic congress. Obama thinks if he says it first, then the other side is all at fault. The transparancy in government doesn't exist, but the individuals claiming it are as transparent as newly washed windows. The sad part is, they get away with it.
Using Internet Explorer 7.0 on Windows XP
30 January 2010 09:16:49
Internet Explorer 7.0 on Windows XP30 January 2010 09:16:49
![[Valid RSS]](http://www.lucente.org/images/valid-rss.png "Validate my RSS feed")
[COLUMN] Court decision a victory for free speech
The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday struck another victory for those who believe the Constitution is relevant and that free speech is more than a slogan.
The court, in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, struck down as unconstitutional a provision of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, commonly known as the McCain-Feingold Act. This was probably the most significant First Amendment ruling in many years.
"If the First Amendment has any force, it prohibits jailing citizens for engaging in political speech," Justice Anthony M. Kennedy said in announcing the decision.
The law in question, enacted in 2002, prohibited advertising about candidates funded by corporations or labor unions in the days leading up to primaries and general elections.
A conservative nonprofit corporation, Citizens United, produced a documentary titled "Hillary: The Movie." The 90-minute movie explored the myriad scandals involving Hillary Clinton and her husband, former President Bill Clinton. The movie was shown in theaters and sold as DVDs in 2008 while Hillary Clinton, then a U.S. senator and now the secretary of state, was running for president.
The trouble began when Citizens United sought to advertise the movie on television and distribute it through video-on-demand on cable TV.
The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled that the film was an "electioneering communication." Under that designation, it became subject to the restrictive regulations set forth in McCain-Feingold.
Fortunately, the Supreme Court rightly disagreed with the District Court and ruled as unconstitutional the provision of the McCain-Feingold Act that prevented corporations and unions from spending freely from their own treasuries in the final days of political campaigns.
This provision of the McCain-Feingold Act dates back to 1907 when President Theodore Roosevelt persuaded Congress to forbid corporations, railroads and national banks from putting money into federal races.
This was the third time the court has ruled a part of the law unconstitutional.
However, if you listen to liberals, including his majesty President Barack Obama, this is going to mark the end of the Republic.
Supporters of campaign financing limits, who apparently are opposed to the First Amendment protection of free speech, wrongly believe that such restrictions prevent corruption in elections. Contributors to campaigns, the argument goes, might buy favors from candidates once they are in office.
Does anyone really believe that limiting campaign contributions is going to stop politicians from selling their votes?
The other argument against free speech is such restrictions are necessary because corporate spending would create such an inequality in speech that democracy itself would be undermined.
Does anyone really believe corporate spending will be one-sided? In reality, corporations are on both sides of the aisle and some corporations even give to both campaigns during the election.
The real reason Congress tries to limit campaign financing is because it wants to regulate critical speech.
"Politicians hate criticism, and so they sought to heavily regulate - if not ban - the most effective political speech against them," said Chip Mellor, the president and general counsel of the Institute for Justice, a libertarian group.
In the end, and the court is finally coming to this realization, restrictions on campaign financing are nothing more than government restraint on speech.
Perhaps the turning point in their thinking came when the government lawyer, Malcolm Stewart, during oral arguments last year suggested that books published in the days leading up to an election that have even one paragraph of electioneering in them, such as candidate biographies and the like, could be banned under McCain-Feingold.
The specter of the federal government banning books did not sit well with the conservative justices on the bench. Nor should it.
There is nothing more anathema to a free society than government restrictions on speech, especially when that speech has to do with elections and politics. The Founders were strong advocates of free speech and no speech deserves protection more than political speech.
What was disappointing is that four justices of the Supreme Court, a body that is tasked with defending the Constitution above all else, seem to think it is OK to ban books and other "electioneering" before an election.
That should frighten all freedom-loving Americans, especially if Obama is given another opportunity to name a justice to the court.
category | Column
author | Lucente