MSNBC Breaking Supreme Court Frees Firms from Decades of limits on campaign spending

[deminks]

Source: MSNBC

No story yet just banner

Edited to add AP link here:

Court rolls back campaign spending limits

http://www.seattlepi.com/national/1154ap_us_supreme_court_campaign_finance.html

WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court has ruled that corporations may spend freely to support or oppose candidates for president and Congress, easing decades-old limits on their participation in federal campaigns.

The court on Thursday overturned a 20-year-old ruling that said corporations can be prohibited from using money from their general treasuries to pay for campaign ads. The decision almost certainly will also allow labor unions to participate more freely in campaigns and threatens similar limits imposed by 24 states.

The justices also struck down part of the landmark McCain-Feingold campaign finance bill that barred union- and corporate-paid issue ads in the closing days of election campaigns.

Read more: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/

---

Don't know the vote breakdown yet.

[no limit]

1. You gotta be fucking kidding

[saigon68]

176. Corporations are drinking the Piper tonight

Drinking Champagne from a woman’s shoe is a ritual that dates back to the 1880’s. Prima ballerinas were famously toasted by gentlemen patrons who would pour champagne in the slippers of the dancers and then drink out of them. This tradition was copied by dancing girls of the Folies-Bergère during the days of the Belle Époque of Paris.
The Folies-Bergère featured beautiful women parading around in near nude costumes against exotic backdrops. Also, featured were singers, acrobats, and dramatic sketches. The Folies-Bergère has showcased the talents of many great entertainers and music hall artists including French entertainer Mistinguett and Josephine Baker.

Inspired by this tradition, of drinking Champagne from a woman’s high heel, Champagne maker Piper Heidsieck and shoe designer Christian Louboutin have collaborated to offer “Le Rituel”.

Piper-Heidsieck Le Rituel par Christian Louboutin from Champagne, France Price: $500.00

[ShockediSay]

229. Any federal judge involved with the federalist society should be impeached

for violation of the judicial code of ethics requiring impartiality

and every appearance thereof.

The agenda of the federalist society was to impose a

right wing takeover of our federal courts.

So now we are clearly a Fascist nation.

[BREMPRO]

243. and its TIME to take on corporate "personhood". they are not individuals and therefore

should not be given the same first amendment rights as individuals.

this ruling will just give us more crappy ads to suffer through and more spin. Of course unions now have free reign to spend what they want on campaigns, so there will be more balance, but i fear more noise, misinformation and muddling of the issues and candidates.

i'll boycott ANY corporation that goes nuclear on a candidate or issue, and i suggest everyone else do the same.

[reformist]

282. If you can't VOTE, you shouldn't be allowed to DONATE MONEY.

Period.

[FailureToCommunicate]

341. Giving corporation the right to vote is on TOMORROW's Supreme Court docket...

[reformist]

366. LOL! n/t

[Rosa Luxemburg]

391. Right wing corporate judges (and people vote for the GOP!!)

wtf

[FailureToCommunicate]

450. Just kidding (I hope!) Welcome to DU. I didn't think much could be worse than

the Massachusetts vote, but, surprise,this comes along.

[verges]

479. Dear God...

please tell me that you just forgot the sarcasm emoticon. Because anymore, I really don't find that difficult to believe.

[FailureToCommunicate]

483. Sorry, yes ***sarcasm***

[kimmylavin]

295. And just where will the unions get that money?

From us, the members. Great!

There will be no balance.
Corporations have done everything in their power to de-fang unions.
We simply cannot compete...

[FailureToCommunicate]

451. You are right. There will be no "balance." As Fred Wurthheimer just stated on NPR

radio, the labor unions are not in the same league -money wise- as the huge corporations.
Alas for democracy.
100 hundred years down the drain.

[dotymed]

506. My Union (Indiana Carpenters)

has a huge amount of unemployed people. The worst in recent memory, comparable to the Reagan years. We recently had to raise our dues because of this. Unions have been decimated since Reagan, and can not even come close to competing with Corporate wealth. This will likely, severely affect Union membership (approximately 12% ten years ago) and possibly be the end of Unions, at least as we know them. They may become Corporate owned too. Really, this decision is a cry to arms for the 95% of Americans who are not considered the "ruling elite." Then it will be Marshal Law.....They are trying to start a civil war or they are convinced that Americans are complacent enough to sit by and watch the corporate domination of all of America. USA inc.

[pattmarty]

339. Unions, what unions?????? Do you know the actual number of workers..........

.........in the US that are union members? The last I heard/read it was like 12%. Some balance, gazillion dollar corporations and million dollar unions. Buh, by democracy.

[defendandprotect]

351. No -- it's 8% now . . . only 8% ... and no way unions nor women's groups nor

human rights groups can compete with corporate money ---

especially at the rate our government's been pouring it into their pockets!!!

[pattmarty]

362. Thx for the correction. It's actually worse than a gazillion to a million.

[defendandprotect]

481. And I'm sure you know they were knocked out by every illegal means/Mafia, as well!!

[defendandprotect]

349. We'll need a Constitutional Amendment . . .

[pattmarty]

367. I ain't a lawyer but I would guess that wouldn't have to happen...............

..........That would of course be the bullet proof way, but you probably could do it through legislation. But, it's a moot point isn't it? How would either a const amendment or legislation get through congress now after the decision? It'd be virtually impossible.

[rhett o rick]

382. We had legislation and the court said it wasnt Constitutional. They have spoken.

We need a Constitutional amendment and/or impeachment of that ass-wipe Roberts.

[SpiralHawk]

433. "Cool. Smirk." THE RFCAA*

* Republicon Fatcat Cronies Against America

[Name removed]

461. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[dotymed]

505. IMO, doom and gloom...

This is the the worst decision ever handed down by the SCOTUS. This will ensure that our children (and future generations) are codified as permanent corporate slaves. Corporations are bound, by law, to put their fiduciary (money interests) responsibility to their investors, ahead of all other considerations. So all of this political campaign money (unlimited.....multi-billions) must be considered an investment. If we thought the "Robber Baron" era was a dark time in American history, we haven't seen anything yet. The changes in our Government can only be described as almost pure Fascism. This was bush's final parting shot to America. It guarantees the legal corporate, complete take over of our government. I am really concerned about our future. Please watch Thom Hartman's reaction to this decision.

[babylonsister]

2. If anyone thought politics couldn't get more crooked, they just did. nt

[rhett o rick]

383. And IMHO it will have to get much worse before the general, apathic public wakes the fudge up. nt

[tekisui]

3. Fuck.

[truebrit71]

4. Well there goes the Republic...

...Experiment in democracy officially ends...

[GoCubsGo]

100. It just goes to show you...

"Idiocracy" was actually a documentary.

[JFN1]

203. I thought so, too...!!

:D

[geardaddy]

234. +1

My thoughts exactly.

When will we start installing the Gatorade drinking fountains?

:puke:

[dotymed]

507. Wow, I almost

added a reference to Idiocracy in my earlier post, but I thought it may be too obscure. Glad to see others watch these types of movies. I was going to "silly movies", but it is now a relevant movie.

[ezmerelda39]

303. Decision

Democracy was officially murdered today by the hands of the
Supreme Court.  This decision was the last nail pounded into
the coffin of our dearly, beloved Democracy.  There will be no
visitation and the burial will be held in darkness and in
secrecy.  Fairwell, Old Friend.  You served us well.  You will
live in our hearts and minds forever.

[beac]

322. A belated WELCOME to DU.

What a terrible, terrible day for all of us. Makes me want to curl into the fetal position and never uncurl. :(

[dotymed]

508. I went a little "over the edge" yesterday

when I heard the SCOTUS decision. I am taking a political science course online and I e-mailed a "rant" to every member (including the instructor) of my "class." I am afraid to check the replies, I may be asked to withdraw from the class or at least be considered emotionally unstable. The class is made up of mainly 18-25 year olds. I am sure they thought I was just being overly dramatic. I called my (Presidential scholarship winner) daughter to discuss this decision. I could tell she thought it was "much to do about nothing." Unfortunately, most of our young people, (who this will affect more than me) are unaware of, or just too busy to care about the ramifications of this decision. Chicken Little here.....

[Zorra]

521. No. The war for democracy officially begins. No holds barred. SCROTUS is a threat to our national

security.

[Kahuna]

5. Wow. Something else we can thank ralph nader for. THANKS RALPH!!!

You miserable %#$@!&*##.

[msongs]

6. ummm it's dems an repubs who control congress, so thank the POTUS present and past nt

[NJmaverick]

10. One could argue that Bush Supreme Court appontments tipped the scales against justice

and that Bush wouldn't have been in a position to tip those scales if not for Ralph

[still_one]

14. and one can argue if Gore ran a good campaign and choose a better VP choice the

election would have been won by him with a large majority

[KansDem]

159. It was won by him...

...not a "large majority" but a majority nonetheless.

[snake in the grass]

361. By the same token...

...Gore could have fought for his win. Republicans play to win. Any means is allowed and they are very good at it. Meanwhile, our Democratic leaders would prefer to lose with honour than actually get their hands dirty. In essence, we have two choices; side with the psychopathic criminals or the criminally invertebrate, and neither one is particularly attractive.

[jmowreader]

371. A lot of the rank and file Democrats feel the same way about losing

I have read right on this message board, when I suggested the simple expedient of campaigning like Republicans do, "I would rather lose than stoop to their level." Which, of course, is why we lose.

Instead let's campaign like LBJ, who once suggested to his campaign staff they start a whispering campaign that his opponent enjoys connubial relations with his barnyard swine. His staff was aghast. "But we can't call him a pigfucker!" 'True...but let's see the SOB deny it.' The sad thing is, the GOP is very, very good at calling Democrats pigfuckers.

[snake in the grass]

487. Ironically...

...we wouldn't really have to 'stoop' to their level, i.e. making things up or playing with the prejudices of the electorate. A simple and frank delivery of the truth, complete with naming the perpetrators by name, would suffice. Example: the turds who fought against the Franken amendment, which was created to ensure that employees of companies who receive government contracts have legal recourse, if a crime (like rape) is committed against them. That's a gift on a silver platter for the Dems, but how much do you want to bet that we will not hear a peep about it come election time? I'd make sure every one of those pig fluffers would be a household name by the time election day comes. The parties aren't carved in stone, so I suspect as the GOP continues down the path of insanity, our party will continue to move to the right, thus leaving a vacuum on the left. Perhaps I won't live long enough to see the day that a progressive party actually becomes a serious national contender, but I do not doubt that the day will come.

[ArcticFox]

34. Stop bashing Nader

[Kahuna]

41. You think THIS is nader-bashing???? We have yet to begin to bash

that clown. Why does he hate America?

[frylock]

217. why do you hate democracy?

[Kahuna]

297. I love democracy. But handing over the country to two oil men is just lunacy...

Really... To quote Condi Rice...'who could have imagined....? :eyes: Well, maybe I'm the only smart person left in America, but I told everyone who would listen that giving the white house to two oil men wasn't very smart. And oh yeah..I also told them about that Supreme Court thingy.

[defendandprotect]

348. GORE also had connections to OIL -- PLUS you had Lieberman as Trojan Horse . . .!!!

hmm..... had anything happened to Gore, we'd be a theocracy!!

How do you like Lieberman running the Democratic Party now????

[defendandprotect]

347. And the same thing is going on with Jane Hamsher now .... why?

BECAUSE SHE HAS THE GUTS TO CRITICIZE A DEMOCRATIC ADMINISTRATION AND ITS

POLICIES -- AND ITS FAKERY!!

Oh . . . we just didn't notice that MA wanted government run health care by 82% ---

similar to MEDICARE FOR ALL --????

eh . . . that's 82% --- 82% --- 82% ---- !!!!!

and that Catholics also want government run health care by large majorities -- 73%-83%

when Latinos/Latinas are included --

and those Catholics want either the government or private insurance to COVER CONTRACEPTION

AND ABORTION ....

eh... that's abortion for any reason by 51%-53% --!!!

Larger majorities for for abortion for health reasons, rape incest, abnormality of

fetus -- etal --

Meanwhile, Pelosi has been out kissing the butts of the US Catholic Bishops and taking

phone calls from Rome!!!

Time to get your head on straight about Nader --

the problem is with two party tyranny -- not Nader.

The problem is with a Democratic Party which is not fighting back against fascism.

The problem is with a Democratic Party with the same CORPORATE OWNERS as the GOP party!!

[Goldstein1984]

369. FDL has a solid following.

Jane Hamsher is only getting criticism from predictable sources.

Those who speak truth to Power are always vilified by those who crave or cater to Power.

If this SCOTUS decision doesn't create the popular dissent necessary to shake things up, then nothing will, and we're a nation of sheople. If enough do get stirred up, I expect FDL to play a prominent role.

(By the way, I agree that Nader, is the sense that I believe in chaos and the butterfly effect, probably is responsible for giving Bush the opportunity to change the SCOTUS, but having that effect and being villied for being a key element of a much larger and more complex picture are two different things.)

[defendandprotect]

393. You're wrong again... We have Joe Biden to thank for putting Clarence on the SC....

Joe Biden worked very deceptively to keep info about Clarence Thomas and

his perversions from being heard --

While lying to the lawyers and telling them that these witnesses would be

heard he worked to BLOCK any new testimony other than Prof. Anita Hill's.

Jane Hamsher is sharp and brilliant -- and telling the truth about Democrats

isn't popular here whether it's Hamsher or Nader!

Get out your calculator and put in 300,000 "Democrats" in Florida voted for W Bush ---

and 600 Illegal military ballots were counted for W Bush ---

and see what results you get --

Meanwhile, the GOP-sponsored fascist rally stopped the vote counting in Miami Dade County

without police interference!

And, what was begun by Fox/Jon Ellis by RECALLING Florida from Gore was finalized by

the Gang of 5 on the Supreme Court putting W in the Oval Office.

Meanwhile, the press recount shows that Gore won the election, INCLUDING IN FLORIDA!!


So -- what does your calculator say now?

[Goldstein1984]

403. Again? I love my calculator!!

I'm actually in the process of upgrading from my 18-year-old HP 48SX to the HP-50G!

I didn't remember Biden's roll in the Clarence Thomas confirmation hearings. I do remember I was in Baltimore on business at the time, and I found the circus so offensive that I turned off the television and just spent my spare time at the Baltimore Aquarium. (Funny how you remember that stuff).

And I do know that Gore won the popular vote. I've always enjoyed it when he introduces himself during talks and adds, "You may remember me. I was elected President by the people of the United States in 2000." I've always viewed that election as stolen, a result of a predictable party-line decision by SCOTUS, and chief among my reasons for never acknowledging W as a legitimate U.S. President.

Has my calculator offended you? It had nothing to do with the 2000 SCOTUS decision. It was probably tucked away in my backpack and somewhere along the Trans-Alaska Pipeline in November 2000.

[defendandprotect]

478. Only if it suggests to you that

Nader was in any way responsible for W in 2000 --

:)


And just a PS on this --

Re the Thomas Hearings, you seem to be saying that you were aware that

he was being charged with sexual harassment of Prof. Anita Hill at the EEOC offices

and tuned out because of what you considered a "circus" atmosphere?

You had no interest in whether or not a pervert would reach our Supreme Court?

Or whether someone generally inferior and underqualified would?

I don't get it ...

[Goldstein1984]

503. It's simple.

I'm from Alaska. At that time, our congressional delegation was Stevens, Murkowski and Young--guaranteed confirmation votes. One need only watch parts of the hearings to understand all of the hearings; one need only check the paper to get the highlights, from nicknames to pubic hair in the beverage.

Was I interested?--Yes
Was I aware?--Yes
Was I going to sit around in a hotel room wallowing in it?--No

I was out protesting Vietnam when I was twelve.
I was out picketing the tomato and lettuce fields when I was 17.
I'll keep my own council on what hearings I watch.

[defendandprotect]

524. Well, that explains it a little differently . . .

[Old and In the Way]

493. Nader promised not to run in states that were close. He spoiled New Hampshire

Look it up. With New Hampshire in the D column, Jeb Bush and Kathryn Harris could go pound sand. No Bush v. Gore. No 9/11. No Iraq War. No stolen 2004 election. No Citizens United v. FEC

Screw Nader...I'm a Democrat and I've more than a dime's worth of difference from your typical Republican...

But, here's something quite illuminating about Ralph-
http://washingtonindependent.com/71475/ralph-nader-rejoins-the-tea-parties

Ralph Nader Rejoins the Tea Parties
Buzz By David Weigel 12/18/09 11:59 AM

Benjamin Sarlin talks to Ralph Nader, who’s celebrating at least the 20th anniversary of his transition from interesting public advocate to self-defeating scold, about health care. Nader, predictably — and with a lack of understanding of congressional politics that must be willful — blames Barack Obama for selling out liberals. But one thing that separates Nader from other liberal critics of the health care compromise, like Howard Dean, is his alliance with the conservative activists who now lead the Tea Party movement.

In 2004, when Democrats — rather understandably — were trying to make it hard for Nader to make it onto state ballots, the candidate got unexpected help from Citizens for a Sound Economy — the group that would later split into FreedomWorks and Americans for Prosperity. In Oregon, one of the states where Nader voters nearly helped throw the election to Bush in 2000, CSE enlisted its volunteers to collect signatures for Nader.

“We saw it as an obvious opportunity to split the liberal base in a swing state,” Matt Kibbe, CSE’s president and CEO told ABC News.

Kibbe said the effort to bolster Nader’s popularity is also part of a plan to force Kerry to compete for liberal votes, thus complicating any efforts to appear more moderate.

Kibbe is now the president of FreedomWorks. Way back in 2004, Howard Dean actually debated Nader about his decision to take this kind of help from conservative activists. It’s an interesting footnote now — probably more interesting than Nader’s predictable backseat whining and scolding.

-----------------

In conclusion, Ralph is a naive fool and tool of the Republican Party. Whether he likes it or not, he was instrumental in allowing the Republicans to grab the opening that has wrought such damage on this country. Stop apologizing for him.

[ProudDad]

527. Get a life!

this Nader hater crap went out of style years ago...

And it won't make you spineless Dems any better off to continue this bullshit lie...

[Old and In the Way]

528. "won't make you spineless Dems any better off"

Thanks for outing yourself as something other than a Democrat. A Nader moron or a Republican tool...take your pick.

[ProudDad]

529. There are other choices

I've been an activist since 1964...

I lobbied against ronny ray-gun when that piece of shit was governor of California...

I was a Target of the Nixon/Hoover CoInTelPro...

Nope, not a republican tool...

Although you spineless dems ARE corporate tools if you continue to support this bunch of cowards... Nader just calls it the way it is in the Corporate USAmerikan Empire, the morons are those who keep getting kicked in the nuts by the dems and repukes and keep believing that they'll change this time. Now that's moronic!

Someday, this country will have to grow a 2nd political party; a Worker's, Real People Party to counterbalance the two right-wings of the Corporate Capitalist Big Business Party...

I am an Anarcho-Syndicalist with Socialist tendencies, in other words, a high-functioning human being with an unclouded mind.

I'm not anyone's tool!

[D23MIURG23]

453. Why do you hate reality?

Go have fun with your scapegoat if it must, but if you can't see anything beyond Nader in the past 9 years worth of politics you truly are blind.

[NJmaverick]

62. why?

[change_notfinetuning]

133. Becaauuuse - Gore would have been president if he had won Tennessee!

Tennessee, his home state. What do we call a presidential candidate who can't win his own state, but expects to win the presidency by winning the others?

LOSER

[Kahuna]

148. You call a president who can't win his own state, george bush. He was from CT. nt

[change_notfinetuning]

154. Stretching a bit? Bush was the immediate past Governor of Texas. n/t

[Cherchez la Femme]

156. Wow

Keep running your mouth.
You have removed all doubt.

[winyanstaz]

298. You are correct....the ones that are bashing your post....

are in denial.
He was raised and born in CT...he only moved to Texas because his Dad controlled the state and they knew they could get him elected there.
He is no more a Texan than I am the Queen of England.

[Duppers]

169. WTF??!!!

Because a mostly ignorant redneck state refused to recognize wtf that had?!



The collective IQ of Tennessee bottomed out in 35+ yrs ago.

[change_notfinetuning]

191. Shirley, you jest. Tennessee is a great state. I love it and refuse to disparage it

just because they voted against Gore in 2000. I blame that on him. He could have had Clinton campaign for him and he would probably have won.

[NJmaverick]

190. We must never forget the huge mistake made by those voting for Nader

as we don't want history to repeat itself. That whole those who don't learn from history thing.

[change_notfinetuning]

205. But Rahm Emanuel . . . shhhhhhhh. Mum's the word. The architect of this

assault on middle class America - Rahm Emanuel - let's put him on the Supreme Court. How does that sound NJmav? Maybe we can give tax credits to these corporations contributing to campaigns, too? Why stop halfway?

Stupid comment? No more stupid than blaming Ralph Nader forever, for everything. Stick a fork in me. I'm done!

[frylock]

218. and let us not forget the 200,000 dems who voted for bush..

as much as you would like to sweep that under the rug and engage in your two-minute hate against naderstein.

[Kahuna]

291. Who could blame them? nader said there was no difference. No doubt

the assclowns believed him.

[frylock]

301. they prove that there is little difference every day..

nader looks like a fucking genius to anybody paying attention.

[dotymed]

509. AGREED

[defendandprotect]

399. That was 300,000 "Democrats" in Florida who voted for W Bush...!!!

300,000 . . . 300,000 . . .

:)

[RoccoR5955]

420. But we all know that they can't count in FloriDUH!

And the vote was rigged. AFAIC, the vote of the entire state for 2000 is INVALID!

[defendandprotect]

471. Funny . . . thank you . .. but ...

just wanted you to know that the actual figure is 100,000 higher than you've

been posting!!

And bless you for posting that truth!!!

:)

[Vermontgrown]

285. As long

as America has a two party system we're fucked.

[defendandprotect]

400. Ouch . . . you just mentioned the BIG TABOO HERE . . . !!!

[RoccoR5955]

423. It's not a two party system, it's a 1 party system...

Both parties are bought, lock, stock and barrel by corporate interests, so it may LOOK like two parties, but it's actually one corporate party.

[nimvg]

469. I Hate To Tell Ya...

...but that's not gonna change. There are two podiums in the House, not three. George Washington wanted it that way because he hated parties and thought we should all be going in the same direction. Even today, American governance is about "between the forty yard lines" and little else. Our whole legislative process is built around this.

[aquart]

435. Maybe you should find out what went on in TN for that vote.

Before you spout your right wing catchphrases.

[defendandprotect]

353. Because you were given Nader as a "scapegoat" because the Democratic

Party found it inconvenient to have him out there telling the truth about them --

and giving the public other options!

The truth about the election has nothing to do with Nader -- it has to do with

the Dems not fighting back -- folding in the face of fascism.

From Fox/Jon Ellis to Jeb Bush and his Secretary of State --

from the GOP fascist rally to stop the vote counting mandated by the Florida State

Supreme Court -- all the way to the Gang of 5 on the Supreme Court putting W in the

White House!

And, by the way, you have Joe Biden to thank for Clarence Thomas making it to the

Supreme Court. He should have not only been blocked, he should have been tossed in jail

for inflicting his sexual perversions on Prof. Anita Hill at the Equal Opportunity

Employment Office!!! Wow . .. talk about up being down!!

[Zoeisright]

179. No.

[MUAD_DIB]

198. Yeah! It is not Nader's fault that he and his supporters

are hopeless egotists.

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

[Zoeisright]

177. Yep, you're right.

Anybody who can't see that is blinded by... something.

[struggle4progress]

193. Um ... Bush was essentially appointed by a 5-4 SCOTUS ruling in late 2000. Here, again,

we have another 5-4 decision against the public interest

[defendandprotect]

402. True . . . and ...

Joe Biden enabled the appointment of Clarence Thomas to the Supreme Court

by ensuring that those who had additional info about his sexual perversions

and sexual harassment of employees at the EEOC were not heard.

And Biden very deceptively told the lawyers and witnesses that they would be

heard -- as they waited thru the night -- and then he shut down the hearing!!

According to Clarence Thomas' FRIENDS he was a sexual pervert fond of gross and

sexually explicit comments!

[MUAD_DIB]

196. One could argue that pretty easily.

[dbonds]

260. Wrong, he would have tipped it anyway.

Gore won that election. It wasn't Ralphs fault that he had people that actually voted for him, thats democracy. But continue as you always do to try to blame everything on the progressives. It doesn't even anger me any more. That line is like the crazy uncle in the corner of the room spouting nonsense at family get togethers.

[mistertrickster]

320. Yup, I hadn't thought of that, but you are correct. Had Ralph not F-ed Florida,

President Gore would have replaced Reinpuke with an actual Justice instead of right-wing ideologue.

Ralph Nader = Arrogant plick.

[defendandprotect]

354. You had the pervert Clarence Thomas on the Court because of Joe Biden . ..!!

[Goldstein1984]

355. I think this is the first time I've ever agreed with you

So I just wanted to make note of the occasion.

[harkadog]

415. One could argue that but one would be wrong.

Bush appointments took place in his second term. So if by some misplaced logic you are going to blame Nader then you have to blame Kerry twice as much.

[verges]

486. Bush only won 2004 because he was an incumbent. nt

[harkadog]

522. You can say that about 95% of politicians.

So what? What is your point?

[verges]

525. Whether anything happened in the first or second terms

doesn't matter. The second term only happened because of the first. The first happened at least partially because of Nader.

[harkadog]

531. If you were around 100 years from now you

would be blaming Nader for whatever was wrong then by your tortured 'logic'.

[verges]

532. Cause and effect can hardly be desribed as tortured logic nt

[wordpix]

72. ummm this is a SCOTUS ruling, not an Admin. one or Congressional legislation - geesh

:crazy:

[defendandprotect]

344. Rather -- "Thanks, Joe Biden for putting Clarence Thomas on the Court" . ..!!!

[earthside]

15. What are you talking about?

Nader has always supported public financing of elections.

As to the composition of the Supreme Court, which Bush nominees did the Senate Democrats filibuster?

Oh yeah, none.

[dsc]

24. that is a total lie

both Alito and Roberts were filibustered but unsuccessfully. In contrast to Sotomayor who wasn't filibustered at all.

[earthside]

42. Ahemm.

Lot's of talk, no action.

Attempt to Filibuster Alito Goes Nowhere - http://articles.latimes.com/2006/jan/31/nation/na-alito31

Roberts filibuster unlikely, 'Gang of 14' says - http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2005-07-21-roberts-filibuster_x.htm

[dsc]

48. both of them had cloture votes

those are necessary when a filibuster occurs. It was an unsuccessful one but it did occur.

[salib]

68. Ahemm. A cloture vote is REQUIRED in the Senate

Remember, it simply means end of discussion, time to vote.

A filibuster would mean an unsuccessful cloture vote.

Neither of them were filibustered.

[earthside]

160. And actually ...

... this is kind of a stupid line of argument, that is blaming the majority SCOTUS votes on Nader.

Who thinks Rehnquist or O'Connor would have voted differently?

Maybe the original post should be blaming George Wallace (who got Nixon elected who appoint Rehnquist) and John Anderson (the independent who ran in 1980 arguably helping Reagan get elected who appointed O'Connor).

[salib]

328. Very good point

These horribly timid people (or scared shitless) who keeps agonizing over how something a little bold (Nader running) can somehow spoil everything are really making me sick.

If they want to curl up in their closet, then they should just do that now and leave us to do some good.

In a BOLD way.

[defendandprotect]

388. PLUS we have Joe Biden to thank for putting Clarence Thomas on the Court--!!!

Biden did everything he could to block info coming out about Clarence Thomas

perversions --

Biden blocked anyone other than Prof. Anita Hill from testifying about Thomas'

perversions . . . in the EEOC which he was put in charge of!!

Sexual harassment in the EEOC!!!

Dozens of people were waiting to tell the truth about Clarence Thomas --

Biden blocked them all while lying to the attorneys that they would be heard!!

[defendandprotect]

358. And Joe Biden gave every assist to Clarence Thomas reaching the Court ---

Thomas was a pervert, sexual harassing Prof. Anita Hill at the EEOC --

Equal Employment Opportunity !!!

Should have been put in jail -- !!!

Biden bent over backwards to keep all the info hidden --

[onehandle]

18. Yep. He worked to elect Bush and got what he wanted. Thanks Ralph! nt

[The Stranger]

50. That's oft-repeated lie once had traction, but no more.

We all know better in the here and now.

[Kahuna]

57. Except that, it's not a lie. The proof of that is that nader ran AGAIN in 2004

to assure his pal bushie another term.

[intheflow]

81. Nader got .038% of the vote in 2004.

You're on crack if you think that helped Bush get another term.

[Kahuna]

89. I never said it helped. Learn to read. I said, he wanted insure a second

term for bush. After 2000, what other results would he expect, even if it didn't really matter.

[intheflow]

158. Please give me a link where Nader says he ran in '04 so Bush could win again.

Nader thinks BOTH major parties are corrupt, which is why he has run as a Green and an Independent. To say he runs to get either major party elected is a patent falsehood.

[Ghost of Tom Joad]

219. 90,000+ votes in Florida

where would those votes have gone without Nader?

[harkadog]

418. Nader got 33,000 votes in FL in 2004.

Your claim is made up BS. Bush won by 380,000.

[pattmarty]

345. You're kidding, right?

[defendandprotect]

472. And there was no Ohio steal . . . !!!

Do you live in a cave?

[Flaneur]

185. Pathetic Nader bashing. Dems would be better off looking in the mirror...

...for the source of their problems.

[bkozumplik]

199. agreed

It is convenient to have some third person to carry the pail of piss and be hated.

thanks Ralph.

[ShockediSay]

238. Why bother to vote with the vast bulk of campaign advertising and those beholding

to funding, are bought by corporafascists?

[defendandprotect]

359. 300,000 "Democrats" in Florida voted for W Bush . . . I think you need to learn to count -- !!!

[RoccoR5955]

422. No, but they need to learn to count in FloriDUH...

The whole vote was rigged in FloriDUH in 2000, and the entire thing should be considered INVALID!

[defendandprotect]

474. Of course it should have . . .

but odd and nonsensical things continued to happen as the STEAL went on --

Remember there was some legal action by the people impacted by the "butterfly ballot" --

they lost!

On and on the STEAL went -- from Fox/Jon Ellis to the Gang of 5 -- !!!

:)

[rhett o rick]

389. Ralph only could vote once so maybe you should blame the people that voted for him.

People that believe him when he said both party's were corrupt. Or you could blame the idiots that voted for bush* or the SCOTUS that violated their Constitutional duty and gave bush* the election. Or blame Gore for not meeting the expectations of enough voters to get a big enough majority to win.

But no, you choose to blame Ralph Nader. If rationalization is the key to happiness, you must be ecstatic.

[Old and In the Way]

494. Quite true.

Turns out, there's not a dime's worth of difference between a Nader voter and a Republican voter. They are both rubes that get conned into believing political fairy tales.

[Democat]

25. Nader, Gore, Kerry...

Thank to all of you.

[karynnj]

333. Kerry and Gore did everything they could

If Terry McAuliffe would have understood the ramifications of Mccain/Feingold, he likely would NOT have picked such an early Democratic convention - making Kerry stretch money over 13 weeks, while Bush could use an unlimited amount for the first 5 weeks, and stretch the money over 8 weeks. That ALONE could account for the difference.

Not to mention, if a certain ego bound former President would not have decided that the best time for the book tour for his book was late June - August 2004, where the most notable items were that the rason for Monica was "bacause I could" and his polite comments about Bush's war and how the left (and our nominee) were wrong to criticize.

Also, he had a VP from hell who refused to even use the campaign's slogan because he had morphed into an ego monster, who thought he knew better than the head of the ticket, who had soundly beat him in the primaries and who had FAR more experience.

Even with all that, a biased media and a country still traumatized he would have won had there been an adequate number of voting machines in Democratic strongholds. The Democrats and Republicans were given the number of machines a few days before the election. The problem is NO ONE in any county saw that there were fewer machines in some places than in the primaries. That was not something the candidate, who was working his heart out could have been expected to supervise - the state party, of even the DNC should have been securing the election.

Kerry himself did an exceptional job.

[defendandprotect]

363. Lieberman was a Trojan Horse -- and love the way he's running Dem Party now -- !!!

[The Stranger]

47. Worst. Post. Ever.

Please, this is embarassing. Ralph Nader had notafuckingthing to do with the Supreme Court.

[Raster]

56. Ralph Nader will now be blamed for global warming and the earthquake in Haiti.

The Nader haters need to give it a rest.

[galileoreloaded]

93. You just KNOW that asshole was involved!!

:sarcasm:

[change_notfinetuning]

195. You forgot the heartbreak of psoriasis. Darn that Nader. n/t

[Kahuna]

58. Bull. Federal elections determine the makeup of the USSC. Nader

knew that when he engineered a win for bushies because he thought there was no difference between the candidates. Really ralph? No difference? What about SCOTUS appointments?

[The Stranger]

63. Now that bullshit is becoming bizarre bullshit. Gore wasn't running for the Supreme Court.

Nader wasn't even running for the Senate that approved Alito and Roberts.

This has gone far off the reservation.

[Kahuna]

144. bzzzt!! Actually, he was. All presidents run so that the justices they

appoint will represent their their governing philosophy. Afterall, bush tried to appoint his squeeze, harriet myers. Remember that?

[OnyxCollie]

249. LOL!

Chimpy nominated Harriet Miers to cover his ass in the US Attorney scandal. She pulled her nomination after the conservatives (believing her nomination was because Chimpy thought she was actually qualified) scoffed.

Turned out to be an unnecessary measure, as Dems let them get away with everything.

Edit for grammar.

[The Stranger]

384. That's the stupidest fucking thing I have ever seen posted. You're saying Ralph Nader, of all that

he is, and of all the things he can and cannot do, ran for president to align the Supreme Court in such a way that it would end up providing corporations the same free speech rights as individuals.

That is the stupidest fucking thing I have ever heard in my life.

[verges]

490. No. But that was a result.

Nader should have understood that his running would split the Dem base. And, that after election, the new Repub Prez would appoint conservative Justices.

[The Stranger]

518. Nader knew long before we did about "leaders" like Harry Reid, who ceded a 41 seat MAJORITY to the

Republicans this week because he refuses to do what they have done for over a decade. If Nader was simply postponing this, then he was far more prescient all along.

But I think that's giving him far too much credit. The problem with the Democrat "leaders" is that they're too busy licking the boots, shoes, tire treads and asses of their Republican and corporate masters. When they do this, they lose the Left. They lose their base.

[verges]

520. That is the goofiest math I've ever seen on DU.

41 out of 100 is most certainly not a majority. Majority means more than half. The Dems still have a 59 to 41 MAJORITY. What was lost was a super-majority; which is needed to overule a filibuster. Well, with the likes of Lieberman, Nelson and the other Conservative Dems, it really didn't do us much good anyway!

[mac56]

147. Speaking of that, why DOESN'T Ralphie run for Congress?

Make a difference that way?

Oh yeah, it's too much fun standing in the spotlight, sabotaging Presidential elections.

And by the way: "off the reservation"?! Dude, really.

[Kahuna]

149. Ooo! Ooo! Me! Me! The answer is...

because he really doesn't want an actual JOB in government. He only wants to shape government to conform to his agenda. His agenda = To ruin America.

[mac56]

153. Go to the head of the class, Kahuna!

:applause:

[defendandprotect]

373. Clap for this . . .300,000 "Democrats" in Florida voted for W Bush ....

Now try to learn to count --

Gore won including in Florida --

The decision came ONLY from the Supreme Court --

and guess how the Gang of 5 got Clarence Thomas ....

they got him THANKS TO JOE BIDEN WHO EVERYTHING HE COULD TO BURY

THE TRUTH ABOUT THOMAS -- AND TO BLOCK THE TRUTH FROM COMING OUT.

[Chef Eric]

447. Thank you, Kahuna, for your fascinating and insightful analysis. nt

[mac56]

514. And thank you, Chef Eric, for the extra helping of snark.

While not adding a pinch of anything to the discussion.

[defendandprotect]

368. Notice that Byron Dorgan is leaving Congress . . . because he can't get anything done!

Blocked by Harry Reid the corporatist ---

Dorgan was trying to get "negotiation" on drug prices -- reimportatation --

Also, was trying to reinstate Glass-Steagall --

Anyone who is worthwhile in Congress is up against corporate/fascism ---

and leadership helping it along ---


Look at what Pelosi did with kissing the butts of the US Catholic Bishops!!!

73%-83% of Catholics want government run health care -- and they want CONTRACEPTION

AND ABORTION COVERED in either the government program or a private program!!


Wake up!

[defendandprotect]

364. 300,000 "Democrats" in Florida voted for W Bush .... can you count -- ???

[Zoeisright]

180. No, yours is the Worst. Post. Ever.

Open your eyes.

[frylock]

220. pick up a fucking book

http://www.amazon.com/Best-Democracy-Money-Can-Globalization/dp/0452283914

[defendandprotect]

374. Greg Palast and the PURGES in 2000 -- Great book -- Great Report!!

[Kahuna]

183. Sure he did. The de-nile isn't just a river in Egypt. nt

[harkadog]

421. How come you are not blaming Kerry?

The SC appointments came in the second term. Blame Kerry for not counting the votes in OH that gave us Bush four more years.

[dana_b]

289. you said it!!

I wanted to say worse but bit my tongue.

[Romulox]

78. Really pathetic. nt

[liberalmike27]

161. Tired of Nader Being Blamed

ANd this problem existed before he ever ran.

Face it, if Nader wasn't in Florida, they'd have just stolen a few more votes. That election was rigged from the start.

Add to that, look who ran with Gore. Liebermann. Him picking Liebermann was the last straw for me, and truth is, Nader voters are historically vindicated now, as Liebermann is the worst kind of political drek.

[Kahuna]

288. I'll bet you're tired. But being in denial won't change the fact that nader

did severe damage to this country. I really don't know what it will take to undue the damage he has done. Oddly, nader seems to be very satisfied with himself.

[OnyxCollie]

316. So the SCOTUS stopping the recount in Florida had nothing to do with it?

It was all Nader's fault? Is Nader is responsible for oil companies directing our foreign policy too?

No, that was the SCOTUS, CHENEY V. UNITED STATES DIST. COURT FOR D. C. (03-475) 542 U.S. 367 (2004).

Can't admit the SCOTUS has damaged this country, can you? Keep deferring to power and attacking the weak.

[Old and In the Way]

495. Methinks the Nader defenders here voted for Ralph.

Sucks to own up to your personal responsibility. Of course, most probably thought...."it's OK, Ralph won't win, but Gore will win anyway. I can be a cool person (above Party politics and support the Party of One) and throw away my vote." Nothing wrong with that. Lots of people get conned in politics. Nader voters, Republican voters, even 300,000 Democrats in Florida!

[Mendocino]

370. The repugs stole the election and then managed to get

the left to blame Nader. It was a Karl Rove Two-fer.

[defendandprotect]

404. Right . .. don't we just love how Lieberman runs the Dem Party -- !!???

great post -- !!

:)

[snagglepuss]

178. self delete

[Webster Green]

182. Um, Gore won in Florida.

Thank the Supreme Court. They stopped the vote counting and appointed the chimp.

I like the idea that third party candidates can run. We need some sort of system that isn't limited to two political parties. (Both of which are corrupt to the core).

Some sort of proportional representation would have been far better than our 2 party, winner takes all system.

This new ruling will be the final blow to our "democracy". The Supreme Court has destroyed the U.S.

[rem3006]

200. Not True

They stopped the counting after the seventh count in some areas. The complaint that went to the court was that the criteria for counting a paper ballot kept changing in violation of state law. Can't change the rules after the fact. The boards were going under the assumption that there is no such thing as an 'under vote' where a voter simply makes no choice for one office but does for others. They kept trying to divine an 'intent' that may not have been there. Nader got a few thousand votes in Florida and I seriously doubt any of them were Republicans. Had he not run, it's reasonable to assume that those votes would have gone to Gore an those would have eclipsed the 500 something spread. I have counted the vote at precinct level and seen both under votes as well as stupid write-in's. Mickey Mouse is always the number one vote getter in write-ins. Just some peoples way of protest.

[liberation]

277. What is with the entitlement the Dems feel for the votes that went for Nader?

Sure, if all those voters for Bush had not showed up, Gore would have won. Or if all the voters who voted for everyone else had voted for Gore, Gore would have won. And if my grandma had balls, we would have called her Grandpa.... all those items make as much sense as expecting those who voted for Nader would have exactly voted for Gore.

I just feel amazed by the fact that some Dems could base their whole argument on a completely fabricated assumption based on a weird sense of entitlement to other people's votes. The same people who voted for Nader were by the way Green party members and unabashed liberals/leftist, the very same people for whom some of the Dems feel nothing but utter contempt.

I just think it reeks of hypocrisy to use such antidemocratic justifications to excuse Gore's loss in 2000. It speaks volumes as to why the Dem party has ended up sucking so much. Instead of picking a fight with the real culprits: the Republicans. They go out of their way to blame an old guy who was exercising his constitutional right to run for office an who didn't even got a single digit percent of the votes. That makes some Dems look like a bunch of useless ineffective cowards if you ask me. It certainly explains a lot and why the Dems could not govern their way out of a wet paper bag.

[frylock]

427. well stated!

:applause:

[defendandprotect]

378. No -- It's True . . . that was the result of the Press Recount of all votes . . .

and they were announcing it just about the time we had 9/11 ...!!!

The GOP-sponsored fascist rally stopped the recount in Miami-Dade County with

no police interference!!

300,000 "Demcorats" in Florida voted for W Bush --- put that in your calculator!!


600 ILLEGAL military ballots were counted for Bush --

And it was the Supreme Court which put Bush in the Oval Office ---

and by the way you have JOE BIDEN TO THANK FOR THAT --

HE BENT OVER BACKWARDS TO KEEP THE TRUTH ABOUT CLARENCE THOMAS FROM BEING HEARD --

AND LET A PERVERT ONTO THE COURT!!

[struggle4progress]

189. This decision involves corporate personhood, against which Nader has warred for decades

[defendandprotect]

379. Correct . . . what's Obama saying about this today, or Democratic leadership????

We need a Constitutional Amendment to put corporations back in the box!

[TheEuclideanOne]

208. Thank Ralph Nader?

Can you elaborate? I hate the guy, but would expect him to be against this.

[TheEuclideanOne]

213. Nevermind, after reading some posts I can see the logic.

Wow, bring up Nader and all hell breaks lose. :rofl:

[defendandprotect]

380. Get your calculator and put in 300,000 "Democratic" votes in Florida for W Bush...!!!

-- and try to wake up!

And then understand that Clarence Thomas made it to the Supreme Court

because Joe Biden did everything he could to cover up his sexual perversions '

and sexual harassment of Prof. Anita Hill -- !!!

Joe Biden lied his head off to BLOCK any truthful testimony from being presented!!

[TheEuclideanOne]

416. Okay, asshole.

Read my post before mouthing off. You act as though you are the only one who has figured this out. Did you just figure out how to use google last week and are trying to show off?

[FrenchieCat]

502. If Thomas wouldn't have been confirmed,

it would have been so other conservative asshole.
Biden isn't guilty here. He voted against John Roberts,
and Roberts is the creep who brought this case forward,
and made it be something other than what it was.

Blame Roberts, and since Bush appointed him, blame him too.
We can blame the SCOTUS for stopping the 2000 vote count,
and we blame all of the people that did do shit about it;
barely any protest or anthing; just everyone watching glued to their Teevees...
we can also Blame Nader for taking some votes; even if 10,000 of the 90,000 would have
voted Gore, we'd have had Pres. Gore. We can also blame Gore for not fighting hard enough,
and being a not that great of a candidate, and then we can blame him for picking Lieberman,
who he picked to win Florida, and to distance himself away from Clinton.....who we can also
blame for not knowing how to keep his pecker in his pants. Also blame the media for helping
to impeach Clinton on some bullshit. And Blame them for helping us not COunt the votes.
See there...now that everyone is blamed,
what in the fuck are we going to do about this shit?
Cause that's what I want to know.

[Greyhound]

233. ROTFLMAO!

Yeah, it's Ralph's fault!!11!!

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

[liberation]

242. The 2000s called, they want their silly passive aggressive uniformed memes of misplaced blame back

I guess it is easier to blame some old dude who was exercising his constitutional right of running for office, than actually blame the real culprits of this debacle. Some of whom belong to your beloved party, and some of whom you have been enabling all along. So indeed, you should abuse another citizen exercising his rights if it helps you to not have to actually understand the whole situation and making an educated evaluation of where the blame lies for the 2000 clusterfuck with was the awful campaign that Gore ran against the retarded idiot son of an asshole. Because that would be "hard work..."

Lieberman turned out to be such a great Democrat, right? Good grief.... no wonder we are circling the drain.

[mod mom]

244. How about thanking the Dems for not fighting against the stolen elections that put * in office

in the first place. Alito and Roberts's seats should have been filled by the Democratic president that won. :mad:

[Wednesdays]

263. We really ARE doomed

The SCOTUS hands down one of the most corporofascist decisions ever, and half the comments at DU are about Ralph Nader.

:cry:

[Chef Eric]

443. Don't worry. Harry Reid will write a sternly worded letter to Justice Roberts. nt

[Th1onein]

460. Isn't that the truth!

We are fucked now. We'd better get the hell out of the USA.

[winyanstaz]

299. yup

[defendandprotect]

381. How about thanking Joe Biden for putting Clarence Thomas on the Court -- !!!

[zenprole]

262. Heavyweight Champ

#5 is, by far, the craziest comment I've yet seen on DU. And I thought the tinfoil hats stayed away from the intertubes...

[RetroLounge]

286. Wow, you're a dumbass....

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:
:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:
:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:
:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:
:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

RL

[AlphaCentauri]

302. why losers always blame Nader?

We had 60 votes and we did not even change a them thing

[ObamaKerryDem]

319. Ralph Nader=

FAIL. :thumbsdown:

As does the better part of the Supreme Court...:grr:

[inna]

324. jesus, what a dumb comment.

[JI7]

325. and i'm still hearing people say there is no difference between Obama and if a Republican was Pres

[Toasterlad]

331. I Got a Paper Cut Today. GODDAMN YOU RALPH NADER!

What I typed is exactly as rational as what you typed.

[defendandprotect]

340. You're living a fantasy -- this was a GOP steal and it had nothing to do with anyone

except the fascist GOP --

from Fox/Jon Ellis RECALLING Florida and later calling it for Bush --

to Jeb Bush and his Secretary of State --

to the GOP sponsored fascist rally to stop the vote counting mandated by the

Florida State Supreme Court -- to the GOP's fascist Supreme Court --


You might give some thought to 300,000 "Democrats" in Florida who voted for W Bush!!

But if you haven't figured anything out in 10 years, I doubt you ever will!



PS: Meanwhile, Gore WON the election -- including in Florida.

[rhett o rick]

385. LOL. I get it. very funny. nt

[rhett o rick]

392. Worst post ever mr. scarecrow. Better go see the Wizard of Oz. nt

[RedCloud]

455. nader was more aware of these shenanigans than W or O.

[earthside]

7. Very, very bad news.

This could mean that the final part of the mega-transnational corporate take-over of the United States is now underway.

[RT Atlanta]

8. SOLD... to the highest bidder

Problem is, I dont see the pukes in Congress willing to go along with legislating reforms, and Reid/Pelosi seem to be fucking lap dogs unwilling to "lead" the party on this issue.

See Grayson's Diary on DailKos today for some good insight into the concerns with this issue:

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2010/1/20/827940/-Help-Stop-the-Corporate-Takeover-of-Our-Democracy

[Tim01]

9. We are really sinking to the 7th level of hell. nt

[Ian David]

11. Here's a link: Supreme Court Strikes Down Key Campaign-Finance Provision

Supreme Court Strikes Down Key Campaign-Finance Provision

In a ruling that radically reshapes campaign-finance law, the Supreme Court has
struck down a key provision of the McCain-Feingold measure that bars corporations and unions from pouring money into political ads.

The long-awaited 5-4 ruling, in the Citizens United v. FEC case, presents advocates of regulation with a major challenge in limiting the flow of corporate money into campaigns, and potentially opens the door for unrestricted amounts of corporate money to flow into American politics.

Tom Goldstein of SCOTUSblog calls the decision "a small revolution in campaign finance law."

In the case at issue, Citizens United (CU), a conservative advocacy group, was challenging a ruling by the FEC that barred it from airing a negative movie about Hillary Clinton. CU received corporate donations and the movie advocated the defeat of a political candidate within 60 days of an election. CU argued that the FEC ruling violated its freedom of speech, and that the relevant provision of McCain-Feingold was unconstitutional.

Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI) warned last week that if the court found unconstitutional all efforts to ban corporations and unions from financing political ads, it would take the country "not just back to a pre-McCain-Feingold era, but back to the era of the robber barons in the 19th century."

More:
http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/01/supreme_court_strikes_down_key_campaign-finance_pr.php


Democracy was nice while it lasted.

Citizens United Not Timid can suck it.

[nykym]

29. OK Russ

How are you going to fix this friggin nightmare, talk is cheap!

[Ian David]

37. Yes, but now you can buy as much of it as you like. n/t

[Ian David]

39. Spin this as: Conservatives on US Supreme Court Give George Soros, ACORN Unlimited Power.

That'll get the Republicans on our side working to fix the problem, if we get the teabaggers enraged about it.

[JFN1]

276. This about the smartest suggestion I've read on DU

props to you.

[Thothmes]

283. You can add "Planned Parenthood" to that list.

[karynnj]

377. Brilliant!

[defendandprotect]

406. Very funny--!!!

:)

[last1standing]

12. Did anyone expect a different result?

There's not one branch of government that isn't actively selling us out to the highest bidder. Human beings are becoming nothing more than a disposable commodity in this country.

[defendandprotect]

394. Nope ....

[phantom power]

13. I think I see. Politicians were only 95% or so bought out, and they're shooting for 100%

[NorthCarolina]

16. OK, we're frooked...game over. eom

[sinkingfeeling]

17. CNN says vote was 5-4! Where have we heard that before?

[Kahuna]

36. Of course it was. Any surprise? Think if Gore had been able to appoint

the new justices instead of bush.

[FVZA_Colonel]

206. That, beyond anything else, is why anyone who says there was "no difference" between

Gore and Bush is full of shit.

[Ter]

211. Bush picked Roberts and Alito in term two I think

Are you saying for a fact Gore would have won a second term? 16 years of one party rule isn't likely.

[Hawaii Hiker]

86. Yep, it was 5-4

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2010/01/21/us/AP-US-Supreme-Court-Campaign-Finance.html?_r=1&hp

[onehandle]

98. It would have been 3-6 against if Nader hadn't helped Bush get elected in 2000.

Thanks, Ralph!

[OnyxCollie]

111. Myopic much?

Does Bush v Gore ring a bell?

[Unvanguard]

290. Edit: Nevermind, misunderstood your point. n/t

[OnyxCollie]

294. No problem.

:hi:

[defendandprotect]

395. Joe Biden was responsible for putting the pervert Clarence Thomas on the court --

[rurallib]

19. Not unexpected, but surely a dark day

[derby378]

20. Here come da pain...

http://www.thecorporation.com

[Triana]

21. Last straw. The U.S. of Arse is now completely pwn3d and controlled by corprats

I have had NO regard for the ethics of the Usurping Crap Court since they appointed Booo$hit as King. Thus, I'm not surprised.

I hope we like the looks of Haiti's economy - because that's where ours is headed.

[mike_c]

22. jeebus....

Words fail me.

[dgibby]

23. Well, if we thought our votes didn't count before,

this revolting development removes all doubt. Welcome to the Facist States of Amerika.

[90-percent]

26. January 21, 2010

The day the USA took the final step in enacting a full blown FASCIST TOTALITARIAN POLICE STATE!

It must be very noisy right now at all the graves of our Founding Fathers from all that spinning.

-90% jimmy

[brendan120678]

54. Yes, a full blown FASCIST TOTALITARIAN POLICE STATE...

Except we also have a Democratically elected Democratic President, and a House and Senate controlled by Democrats.

[villager]

103. Democrats in turn controlled by their coporate sponsors...

n/t

[Lorien]

124. Bingo. nt

[OnyxCollie]

126. How democratic are our presidential elections?

Can you turn a DRE over, dump out the votes, and count them yourself? Or do you need secret, proprietary software to give you a result? Can you be sure that it's accurate?

How do you find out about the candidates? They appear on cable news network sponsored debates, whose moderators decide which candidate gets airtime and which ones don't. Later, those same networks create horse races between candidates to keep viewers' attention. The networks decide which candidates are chosen for elections.

When one side can use caging lists to remove voters from voting rolls, how democratic is that? BTW, what have the Dems done to stop that?

Yes, we have a Democratic President and House and Senate controlled by Democrats. Have they stopped the wars? Ended the mortgage crisis? Given us universal healthcare? Stopped torture? Ended domestic surveillance? Replaced politicized US Attorneys? Prosecuted the crimes of bush/cheney? No? But they represent a healthy democratic process, right? Because, after all, you voted.

"The illusion of freedom will continue as long as it’s profitable to continue the illusion. At the point where the illusion becomes too expensive to maintain, they will just take down the scenery, they will pull back the curtains, they will move the tables and chairs out of the way and you will see the brick wall at the back of the theater." --Frank Zappa

[90-percent]

264. Zappa

I love that Zappa quote and use it here all the time.

Today is the day that all of the World is staring at the brick wall Frank was referring to.

Not totalitarian? DO you know that our previous President kidnapped people all over the world and held them without any recourse what so ever. And our current President has these same powers?

Of course we're not fully fascist yet. The frame work for that to happen is being constructed and especially NOT DISMANTLED, so it could happen in our lifetimes.

We have a relatively benevolent President now. But the powers are in place. What will happen in the future when somebody that is not as nice as Bush and Cheney was decides to get medieval on our asses? With all the unchecked additional powers currently in place that are not being dismantled, this will only be a matter of time.

-90% Jimmy

[OnyxCollie]

270. I was fortunate enough to see Zappa twice.

I waved my oven mitt at him and he waved back (Them or Us tour).

[defendandprotect]

397. Yep ... plus LARGE computers used by MSM to PREDICT and CALL elections ... more fakery!

Before the large computers came in, MSM could only report actual vote tallies ---

the LARGE computers gave them vast new powers -- to PREDICT and CALL elections for

candidates!!

And both the large and the small voting computers began coming in during the mid-to-late

1960's . . . coincidentally, about the time America was passing the Voting Rights Act!!!

Was there ever a Southern Strategy . . . or were computers the Southern Strategy?

[ronnie624]

501. *

:thumbsup:

[nutshell2002]

221. "Democratic President, and a House and Senate controlled by Democrats"

And your point is......?

[brendan120678]

231. My point is, that we do not live...

in a Fascist Totalitarian Police State. Nothing even comparable.

And seriously, there is no possibility that we will come even close to having anything like that for the foreseeable future.
Even if we had a Republican President and Republican controlled Senate/House, it would not be a Fascist Totalitarian Police State. It may not be pleasant, but it wouldn't be that.

[OnyxCollie]

266. "...there is no possibility that we will come even close to having anything like that

for the foreseeable future."

Really? Ever read National Security Presidential Directive 51, issued by bush in May 2007?

Policy

(3) It is the policy of the United States to maintain a comprehensive and effective continuity capability composed of Continuity of Operations and Continuity of Government programs in order to ensure the preservation of our form of government under the Constitution and the continuing performance of National Essential Functions under all conditions.

Implementation Actions

(4) Continuity requirements shall be incorporated into daily operations of all executive departments and agencies. As a result of the asymmetric threat environment, adequate warning of potential emergencies that could pose a significant risk to the homeland might not be available, and therefore all continuity planning shall be based on the assumption that no such warning will be received. Emphasis will be placed upon geographic dispersion of leadership, staff, and infrastructure in order to increase survivability and maintain uninterrupted Government Functions. Risk management principles shall be applied to ensure that appropriate operational readiness decisions are based on the probability of an attack or other incident and its consequences.

(5) The following NEFs are the foundation for all continuity programs and capabilities and represent the overarching responsibilities of the Federal Government to lead and sustain the Nation during a crisis, and therefore sustaining the following NEFs shall be the primary focus of the Federal Government leadership during and in the aftermath of an emergency that adversely affects the performance of Government Functions:

(a) Ensuring the continued functioning of our form of government under the Constitution, including the functioning of the three separate branches of government;

(b) Providing leadership visible to the Nation and the world and maintaining the trust and confidence of the American people;

(c) Defending the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, and preventing or interdicting attacks against the United States or its people, property, or interests;

(d) Maintaining and fostering effective relationships with foreign nations;

(e) Protecting against threats to the homeland and bringing to justice perpetrators of crimes or attacks against the United States or its people, property, or interests;

(f) Providing rapid and effective response to and recovery from the domestic consequences of an attack or other incident;

(g) Protecting and stabilizing the Nation's economy and ensuring public confidence in its financial systems; and

(h) Providing for critical Federal Government services that address the national health, safety, and welfare needs of the United States.

(6) The President shall lead the activities of the Federal Government for ensuring constitutional government. In order to advise and assist the President in that function, the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism (APHS/CT) is hereby designated as the National Continuity Coordinator. The National Continuity Coordinator, in coordination with the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs (APNSA), without exercising directive authority, shall coordinate the development and implementation of continuity policy for executive departments and agencies. The Continuity Policy Coordination Committee (CPCC), chaired by a Senior Director from the Homeland Security Council staff, designated by the National Continuity Coordinator, shall be the main day-to-day forum for such policy coordination.

One terrorist attack away from a fascist, totalitarian police state. BTW, Obama has kept this policy.

[vw-fixer]

326. Fascism?

I think that's a tad over blown isn't it? The way I read it, the Supreme Court's ruling today is just the opposite of fascism. Fascism: "centralized control over private enterprise - dictatorial government - extreme nationalism." The highest court of the land just eased way up on the private sector (corporations) by relinquishing restrictions on them. People loosely throw the word "fascist" around without really knowing what it means. Be careful!

[deutsey]

329. They're probably referring to Mussolini's definition of fascism as really being

corporatism...and Mussolini would've known what he was talking about.

[sulphurdunn]

335. Your definition is too narrow in one respect.

Fascism is a political system in which no meaningful distinction exists between the revolving door of corporate power and federal governance whether both are equal or one is dominant.

[pleah]

27. This sucks. n/t

[thereismore]

28. Just what we need. Fascist repigs. Why do we even try. nt

[Democat]

30. Is there any doubt that Roberts needs to be impeached?

Has he ever, even once, ruled against the Republican party line?

That's not a judge, that's a politician. And the Democrats didn't filibuster because they wanted to make Bush happy.

[Abq_Sarah]

140. So are you going to hold the progressive judges to the same standard

And call for their impeachment?

I'm really getting tired of this "criminalization" of political differences of opinion.

[Democat]

278. Give me a break!

There is no "opinion" involved. Roberts is as corrupt as Cheney and Bush. You're defending that? Nice.

[Abq_Sarah]

430. You're pissed off because

He doesn't hold the same opinions as you and you want to punish him for it. That sounds a hell of a lot like what Bush and Cheney would do.

Defend that.

[BumRushDaShow]

31. Time for Congress to pass a new law.

But I expect they will take their time.... ChaCHING! $$$$$ :banghead:

[defendandprotect]

398. We're going to need a Constitutional Amendment ....

[BumRushDaShow]

445. Yup. n/t

[defendandprotect]

476. Was going to mention that Olberman did great tonight and had Grayson on...

then I noticed that you have something that looks like a Grayson pic?

Anyway, Grayson has a petition --

I'll be back with the link --

Here ya go --

PETITION TEXT

I support the "Save Our Democracy" Package:

We cannot have a government that is bought and paid for by huge multinational corporations. We need a government of the people, by the people, and for the people.

http://salsa.mydccc.org/o/30019/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=4&tag=012009_email

Do you get email from him?

You might have it?

[BurtWorm]

32. Welcome to the age of change we can believe in.

[Kahuna]

38. Nice dig at Obama, when it's your hero ralph nader who is to blame.

Thanks for playing anyway.

[BurtWorm]

51. Right.

Ralph Nader is my hero. You pegged me. :sarcasm:

[D23MIURG23]

457. Seriously... who the hell is Obama anyway?

Everyone knows he is totally unimportant compared to Ralph Nader. Ralph Nader is responsible for everything... He got Regan and Bush elected, and undermined the economic policies the kept the middle class together, and every time Democrats get elected he forces them to vote for a bunch of right wing garbage. This is because Ralph Nader is the Dark Lord of the Universe and NO ONE can contradict his evil will. MUHAHAHA!@! MUAHAHAHA!!!!

:eyes:

[flyarm]

33. 5-4 ruling..conservative ruling is what MSNBC saying..eom

[defendandprotect]

408. Replacing a "people's" government with corporatism is fascism . ..

[change_notfinetuning]

35. Welcome to Bendover, America - pop. 300,000,000 suckers

[rucky]

314. Give or take 1%

[liberal N proud]

40. GREED has consumed America

Maybe the corporations can advertise on the backs of the Senators and Congress people they own.

[change_notfinetuning]

138. And NEED has been laughed at and ignored. n/t

[jasi2006]

43. Get ready now t start boycotting products from corporations opposed to Dems.

The only power that peopl really have if they are not wealthy is to stop supporting the businesses that support, control, and own those who fight against us. But in this day and time, it's difficult to tell...so many mega corporations, so much of our meda is owned and controlled by folks who side wih the big money interests agains the ordinary working man. It's just sickening.

[Rozlee]

67. All Corporations are opposed to Dems. We might as well be Amish.

I hate Conservatives. What did that zombie movie say? "When there is no more room in Hell the Republicans will walk the Earth?"

[Crunchy Frog]

120. Corporations own Dems almost as much as they own Repubs.

I refuse to support anybody who's coporate owned.

[Carnage251]

44. WTF

:argh:

[Burma Jones]

45. Every declining empire goes through this.......

the upper strata start scavenging all they can as things go downhill while the rest of us learn to live with lowered expectations.

[SOS]

110. In the words of Joseph Schumpeter

"When there is no ethical sensibility the market ends up devouring every other sector and finally ends up devouring itself."

The next collapse will be the last, but until then the oligarchs will be working overtime to clean us out.

[The Stranger]

46. Stevens read his dissent from the bench. That says something.

Sure am glad the Senate Democratic leadership didn't FILIBUSTER Roberts and Alito.

[Generator]

275. I know the Democratics are totally innocent

In EVERY fucking thing that has happened in this country in the last twenty years. Just innocent bystanders. It's only Ralph Nader's fault. The delusion on this board is so fun.

[The Stranger]

405. It really is bizarre. Someone has declared cyber war on Ralph Nader. Fucking crazy.

[Auggie]

49. We still have the power of the ballot, folks...

at least for now.

[deminks]

53. Not when ESS (Diebold) counts the votes.

They are the one and lonely. The fight will be between Goldman and BOA and others about how many votes they can buy.

[Auggie]

96. We still do, more or less, for the moment.

[Lorien]

116. Yep. No exit polls, and a vote count by a repug corporation

= the end of our democracy. Let's get this thing overturned!

[The Stranger]

64. No we don't. The Republicans hold a 41 SEAT MAJORITY IN THE SENATE now.

[tinrobot]

107. But we don't have the power of the megaphone

How can a "people's" candidate get any traction when they'll be out-advertised 10:1 by the corporate supported candidate?

[Auggie]

170. They don't own the internet yet

[Roland99]

136. Not unless we get true Liberals/Progressives elected. Otherwise, we get corporate puppets

[JFN1]

279. It is too late.

we lost our last, best chance with Obama and the Dem Congress.

now - only corporate approved politicians will be elected.

[Scruffy1]

342. IMHO you overestimate the electorate

Issues never take precedence in elections. And its mostly about personalities, marketing and MONEY.
Hell you can get people to eat the crap at Mac and Dons if you tell them its good often enough. While it may be true that a really good candidate can beat the odds occasionally its generally the well financed and professionally run campaigns that win in state wide and national elctions where it is impossible for a candidate to go directly to the voters. LeBon was right.

[Auggie]

350. Probably n/t

[defendandprotect]

410. "It's not important who votes . . . what's important is who counts the votes" ..!!!

Remember the non-counting in Florida --

and the GOP-sponsored fascist rally to stop the recount --

and the final slam of the SC Gang of 5 putting W in the Oval Office!!

[Jkid]

52. Is there anyway we can fix this by at least federal law?

[No Elephants]

59. Constitutional amendment. There has not be a controversial one in a very long time, though.

[Igel]

95. Partially, at most.

A lot depends on the wording of the opinion.

Personally, I'm surprised it was 5-4. It seemed a slam-dunk to me, if you read the Constitution at something approaching informed face value and also respect stare decisis (something that is viewed, on principle, to be urgently important at times, and, equally on principle, to be utterly disregarded at other times--which is which depends crucially on your politics).

How much it can be "fixed" depends on exactly where the lines are drawn in the opinion--not just in the majority, but also, to some extent, the minority opinions, since they're also likely to give some information about what's allowed or what they'd disallow. Congress needs to know exactly, in painful detail, what's impermissible about the previous rules, what, precisely, can be shown under this ruling to be a compelling government interest in restricting money (which is, unfortunately, by stare decisis and current practice, speech) that doesn't unduly infringe on the right to donate (and thereby speak or support speech you agree with).

[Doctor_J]

125. There is a way to fix it, but it's beyond

the thought processes of most DUers.

It will happen eventually, this decision will speed it along. Be ready when it happens.

[dotymed]

511. I agree

but it is very possible we won't win...maybe another Nation will help us? IDK... I have told my children how ridiculous that 2012 prediction was. I am no longer so sure.

[No Elephants]

55. No surprise. They signaled this months ago. Besides, it's the Roberts court.

Constitutional amendment, anyone? (Fat chance, though.)

Great. Now, ALL the time of our Reps, our most democratic body, will gave to be spent fundraising.

Screw Roberts, Alito, Scalia, Thomas and Stevens.

[Sal Minella]

69. I believe no case was even brought to SCOTUS about this --

the Roberts court just plucked it from past history as something they desired to "reconsider."

So much for Roberts blathering about "settled law" during his confirmation hearings.

Roberts believes in "settled law" except for the ones he wants to exhume and unsettle.

[Cleita]

186. Impeach him. Impeach them all who brought us this. n/t

[harkadog]

425. This was a new case.

Citizens United was a group that made a film about Hillary in Jan. 08. Since it was within 30 days of a primary they went to court to avoid sanctions. It then worked its way up to the SC.

[Sal Minella]

429. But the SC itself chose to use this case to grapple with much wider questions

than "can the anti-Hillary people ADVERTISE the showing of the anti-Hillary movie?"

The broad scope was deliberately chosen and expanded. It's like they were asked to clip a shrub along a highway and they deliberately sawed down Muir Woods.

[harkadog]

436. You are right.

But that in itself is not unusual. The court often tells the parties to expand their arguments and brief other issues when it wants to given an expanded decision on some matter.

[Sal Minella]

444. "Giving an expanded decision" is one thing.

Maliciously choosing to rewrite settled law is quite another.

What they did today was immoral and should be illegal, imo, no matter how you want to slice and dice it.

[Old and In the Way]

497. Remember, only Democrats nominate "activist" judges.

I'm sure the Roberts opinion would be exactly what the founding fathers would have expected. They were all about the Rights of Corporations.






/sarcasm

[Sal Minella]

519. Of course. Thanks for reminding me.

And here I thought that humming sound we're hearing was Thomas Jefferson spinning in his grave.

But it's just the well-oiled corporate machinery revving up to obliterate the will of the citizenry. Nothing to be concerned about, I'm sure.

[OnyxCollie]

141. Kennedy, not Stevens.

According to a post above, Stevens read his dissent from the bench.

Stevens also dissented in Bush v Gore.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

60. Perfectly timed during the Brown blather.

[maddogesq]

61. Wow, fascism, just like I pictured it!

Can I get an Oy Vey?

[Kahuna]

65. Oy Vey!

:banghead:

[Rozlee]

71. Oy fuckin' Vey.

:puke:

[Bragi]

66. If Democrats controlled the WH and Congress...

... then surely a law could be passed to undo this ruling.

Oh. Nevermind.

[andym]

150. No law could undo this

Now we need a constitutional amendment. Or perhaps a wholesale change of Justices who would be willing to turn this decision aside.

[Bragi]

167. I stand (sit) corrected /nt

[MissDeeds]

70. Welcome to the United States of Corporations

The hits just keep on coming. What should be illegal has now been given a pass by the highest court in the land.

[wordpix]

76. founded on "of, by and for the corporation whore-masters"

[Abq_Sarah]

155. It;'s interesting to note

The history of corporations having 1st amendment rights. The deciding case was First National Bank of Boston v. Bellotti in 1978. Justice Stevens voted in favor of corporations having 1st amendment rights and Justice Rehnquist dissented, believe it or not. You wouldn't know that by looking at Steven's dissent today.

[harun]

157. The Corporate Representative Republic of America

[alsame]

73. And the last illusion of democracy is removed. nt

[Javaman]

74. Well, that's it folks. It's over.

we are officially no longer a democracy.

we have just had corporatism slammed down our throats.

what we will become from this point on, I can only fear.

the grand experiment is finished.

To all of those people who have come before us that worked and died to maintain a nation by the people have just perished in vein. And for that, I am deeply deeply ashamed.

I'm an atheist, but the phrase, "may the lord have mercy on our souls" is very apropos.

Evil doesn't come in on lightening, it comes in on cat paws.

On edit: Personally, I welcome our new max headroom corporate overlords. (I'm tired of crying all the time. I have to force myself to laugh)

[intheflow]

75. Oh yeah, It's the labor ads we have to worry about.

Because labor has SO MUCH MONEY compared to corporations. Good God, WTF has happened to my country??

[tonysam]

134. Labor is so gutted now it is a JOKE to pretend unions are going to spend tons of money

This is legalized BRIBERY, naturally created out of whole cloth by this court, just as they twisted the Second Amendment as something it is not.

They make up their own damned rules--to hell with precedent.

[Romulox]

77. Interesting how the potentates of our day reside in the Judiciary...

There is no process, no democracy, no citizen action whatever that can modify this ruling. Only the Lord Above ( :sarcasm: ) can decide when the reign of terror of our 9 little Potentate/Judges shall come to an end.

[Javaman]

79. Actually 5.

4 of them voted against it.

[Romulox]

84. I don't care who voted for what. They have the power of kings, all of them.

In a true democracy, issues of this magnitude should be decided by the governed, not by the whims of individuals (be they on "our" side or "their" side.)

And there is nothing we as citizens can do about it, expect look to our (extremely early!) history.

[wordpix]

82. not all 9 voted for this bad decision - 4 voted against

Strongly disagreeing, Justice John Paul Stevens said in his dissent, "The court's ruling threatens to undermine the integrity of elected institutions around the nation."

Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer and Sonia Sotomayor joined Stevens' dissent, parts of which he read aloud in the courtroom.

[wordpix]

80. "Super Bowl of bad decisions" - at least the more liberal justices got it right

Strongly disagreeing, Justice John Paul Stevens said in his dissent, "The court's ruling threatens to undermine the integrity of elected institutions around the nation."

Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer and Sonia Sotomayor joined Stevens' dissent, parts of which he read aloud in the courtroom.

[MilesColtrane]

83. Aaaaaaand....we're done.

Game Over

[FlyByNight]

85. The republic is doomed

Greed uber alles.

Suppose the HCR bill passes in some form, as watered-down as it is, how will it ever be improved upon or fixed later? The insurance industries will kill any potential reform or probably worsen it. The Rs and DLCers are jumping for joy.

Maybe things need to get a lot worse before they get better. Unfortunately, it's the rest of us who'll suffer.

:scared:

[sulphurdunn]

343. The British Empire is just too powerful.

Pack up you muskets and go back to the farm?

[benld74]

87. OH NOES!! There goes the lobbyist jobs!

[timefortherevolution]

88. ...after this brief interuption, we now return to the story of John Edward's

illegitimate love child.

[deminks]

94. Of course, corporate news source - you know they had that one ready to go.

to cover up what ever horrendous abuse of citizens was going on today.

[reformist]

90. THE ONLY REMEDY TO THIS HORRIBLE DECISION.

Is for the government to require that every candidate be GIVEN free media time, sufficient for the public to understand each candidate's positions.

[reformist]

97. Every candidate must be given 100 hours of free TV time.

The number of hours is debatable. But I see no other way of rectifying the effects of this horribly unfair decision.

[Truth2Tell]

312. You nailed it reformist.

I don't know about numbers of hours, but I do believe we seriously need to take back our publicly owned airwaves and start using them to enable real democracy. That's about our only hope of an escape from our decline at this point.

Welcome to DU! :hi:

[GoCubsGo]

106. There is a second way.

It can be overturned with a Constitutional amendment.

[Wednesdays]

272. Can you name 38 states that will vote to overturn this?

I can't.

[Old and In the Way]

498. Public financed elections would be a good thing.

We have it in Maine. Take the money influence entirely out of the equation. Our Reps can spend their time doing the people's business, instead of fundraising 24/7 before and after the election. No money influence = no political influence (in theory).

[AngryOldDem]

91. That's it. Representative democracy is dead in the U.S.

Unless, of course, you're a special-interest group, corporation, or gazillionaire.

Fuck it. Fuck it all. I'm done.

[Altoid_Cyclist]

92. This makes it official. This will be our new symbol of America.

The good news just keeps coming.

[Romulox]

101. God Bless America!

[Altoid_Cyclist]

142. Excuse the poor pun, but your post is more on target than mine.

[ljm2002]

99. Most Unions are corporations these days, right?

So this means that any limits imposed on unions must also be lifted, under the fact that they too are fictional persons and the equal protection clause.

[Bragi]

102. More corporate campaign spending. Fabulous

Great that the Supremes are addressing the fact that there is just not enough corporate money in American politics.

[Ed76638]

104. FUUUUUU.......

UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUK

[Auggie]

105. Think Tanks must be very busy this morning figuring out ways to capitalize

[tinrobot]

109. I'm sure they already have a head start...

2010 is going to be nasty.

[Auggie]

168. After I posted this I considered plans could have been in the works for years

[Don Draper]

108. We need a constitutional convention

And ban lobbying in the constitution.

[jakefrep]

112. Time to stock up the DVR....

just to have something to watch during campaign season that isn't a political ad.

[reformist]

113. Media companies are LOVING this.

Campaign advertizing is going to become a multi-billion dollar industry!

[Lorien]

114. Demand their decision be overturned:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=7530515&mesg_id=7530515

[DainBramaged]

115. Well, our votes no longer count, it's that simple, unless Congress clamps down

I think my involvement, no matter how small, in politics is over.

[Crunchy Frog]

117. Goodbye America.

:(

[bergie321]

118. Google Bless America

[Blue_Tires]

232. i was about to post that...

man, has it been 10 years already since I first saw that?

[Lorien]

119. Vote breakdown (from your link):

Critics of the stricter limits have argued that they amount to an unconstitutional restraint of free speech, and the court majority apparently agreed.

"The censorship we now confront is vast in its reach," Justice Anthony Kennedy said in his majority opinion, joined by his four more conservative colleagues.

However, Justice John Paul Stevens, dissenting from the main holding, said, "The court's ruling threatens to undermine the integrity of elected institutions around the nation."

Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer and Sonia Sotomayor joined Stevens' dissent, parts of which he read aloud in the
courtroom.


Party lines, as usual. The Lefties voted for Americans, the conservatives for the corporations.

[OhioChick]

121. That's fucked up. n/t

[scytherius]

122. This is the correct decision. We have been focusing on the wrong thing

I have always felt that this was a Constitutional violation and you can't get much more liberal than I. For years I was a criminal defense atty and a judge so did a lot of "constitutional work".

Even though it is a corporation this is political speech, pure and simple, and is the most protected of speech right there with religious speech.

The focus on the corporations "owning" our elections has ALWAYS been wrong. You can not, and should not, restrict their speech via donations, etc. What you DO is you do the same thing that is done with all advertising. You regulate the truth. You make them post warnings. You force them to disclose conflicts of interest. If they are backing something and are trying to hide, you make them disclose it like "SMOKING CAUSES CANCER" on cigarettes.

The limitation on corporate campaign spending has been a waste of time and has actually permitted corporations to get around the issue via shell corps, etc. There has been no focus on disclosure and "truth in advertising".

What has hurt us is the rules as they exist. I rarely agree with the Neaderthal right wingers on SCOTUS but they got this one correct. Now, it is up to the FEC, FCC and others to appropriately (as permitted by the Constitution) to regulate the time, place and manner of that speech. Perhaps, just perhaps, like with big tobacco this will actually HELP in exposing lies. The campaign spending limit BS has failed miserably/

[tonysam]

135. Money ISN'T speech, for fuck's sake.

It ISN'T the "correct" decision.

[Doctor_J]

165. How are you going to regulate truth?

Fox "News" sued for, and won, the right to lie. Do you really believe that the manner and time of corporate propaganda will be reined by the FCC/FEC?

You would probably me more at home in a right-wing libertarian forum. Your grasp of reality seems tenuous

[leftstreet]

224. Interesting

You make good points.

Here's this from a news article this morning (emphasis mine):

The Supreme Court's 5-4 decision today to strike down a ban on corporations taking part in political campaigns will get lots of attention for what it says about those campaigns.

Pundits, though, may miss the more profound implication of the majority opinion -- a ringing endorsement of the First Amendment that could mean stronger language and more adult content on over-the-air television and radio, fewer prosecutions for obscenity, and more lawsuits based on speech limits for students, workers, and others.

http://primebuzz.kcstar.com/?q=node/21079

Hmmm....

[Hippo_Tron]

306. So if money is speech should bribery be protected under the first amendment?

[mistertrickster]

334. If a corporation is allowed political speech (1st Amendment), why is it not allowed to bear arms

under the 2nd Amendment?

Uhh . . . because a corporation is not actually a person? And only a person has the right to anything under the Bill of Rights.

The president of a corporation has the right to political speech. The chairman of the board has a right. A stockholder has a right. The janitor has a right.

BUT THE CORPORATION HAS NO RIGHTS other than what the government grants to it, because it is entirely a legal entity constructed by government itself.

[notesdev]

123. I don't see what the big deal is

Corps had bought out our representatives long ago, and McCain-Feingold didn't do shit to stop them; if anything, it made the situation worse.

Any limits that were in place were at best a formality and a charade. I'd rather have this stuff out in the open where we can see it, rather than under the table.

[scytherius]

132. You are correct. It isn't a big deal.

Nothing has change. The law was a ridiculous attempt to regulate speech. What you do, is you now focusing on what we should have been focusing upon all along . . . truth in advertising.

[Arugula Latte]

139. Yeah, good thing the playing field will be so level.

You know, average schmos who can donate $25 a pop to get their voices heard will surely have no problem countering the corporate agenda.

I shouldn't have to use this but ...

:sarcasm:

[Old and In the Way]

499. Yeah, good luck with that.

When the other side can outspend you 1,000 to one...good luck getting your voice and your candidate heard. As the standard of living increases downward while the corporate profiteering goes on, unregulated, and upward...enjoy your free speech. Because that's all you'll have. The bottom 95% are not going to have a discretionary nickel to part with as the fruits of unfettered capitalism take root.

Truth in advertising? Like that Hillary documentary? Just think what Dave Bossey, with Exxon-Mobile et al. underwriting his free speech, can accomplish in 2012? Obama will be lucky if he escapes Washington with his life.

[Arugula Latte]

127. Is it Fascism yet?

[tonysam]

128. This fucking country is over with. Done. Zip.

Now legalized bribery is the LAW. Buckley v. Valeo was bad enough. Now the people will NEVER be able to pick the candidates who best represent them.

[cliffordu]

129. Game, set and match. Now we are screwn.

[SKKY]

130. Well, this should make things interesting.

[Greyhound]

131. This is worse than bad. n/t

[Blasphemer]

137. God help us. nt

[reformist]

143. Corporations have no right to give money at all, imo.

Here's the rule: If you can't vote for the candidate you support, you can't give him/her money.

[nc4bo]

145. Jesus H. Christ. I'm so disgusted with the way things are going I don't even know what to do

anymore.

I'm feeling the rage more than ever. :nuke: :grr:

[change_notfinetuning]

146. How will the Dems get more $$? Just ask Rahm - turn to the right! n/t

If Barack is lame on this issue . . . I won't say it here.

[alberg]

151. Take away Corporate personhood. That fixes the problem.

[KansDem]

166. Agreed. And I remember reading about Sotomayor referring to this.

Can a corporation be considered a "person" if it can't meet the "endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights" clause of the Constitution?

It would make for an interesting challenge to corporate "personhood."

[reformist]

175. She is so right about this.

The sad thing is that she's looked at as a radical for her position. I hope she's able to persuade the other judges to her way of thinking.

[BP2]

201. Justice Ginsburg once said: "A corporation, after all, is not endowed by its creator with

inalienable rights."


Thank the gods Justice Sotomayor agrees:

"Judges 'created corporations as persons, gave birth to corporations as persons.
There could be an argument made that that was the court's error to start with...
a creature of state law with human characteristics.' "

Sotomayor Issues Challenge to a Century of Corporate Law
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125314088285517643.html

Let's hope she's Chief Justice someday soon!

[fascisthunter]

212. yup

this is the best answer.

[Zoeisright]

152. Welcome to the Fascist States of America.

It's here!

[Kablooie]

162. Wow. If you think congress was in big business pockets up to now, you ain't seen nothin' yet!

[LeftHander]

163. Holy crap...every religious nutjob and RW wacko with $50 to incorporate

can spend millions on smear campaigns.

[KansDem]

164. We'll have the best Free Speech money can buy!

With apologies to Will Rogers...



edited to add the photo...

[Irish_shark]

171. Sotomayor voted against decision

AT least some good news: Sotomayor is not a corporate puppet.

[FVZA_Colonel]

172. We are now one step closer to living in the world of Shadowrun, but without

anything that made that world interesting and exciting.

Lone Star and SINS here we come!

[NashVegas]

173. "Happy Days Are Here Again ..."

[Jefferson23]

174. 5 to 4, Kennedy joins the schmucks. I can't stop saying Oh my God.

[h9socialist]

181. If they want to be REALLY HONEST about it . . .

Why don't they just rule that from now on all political offices in the federal government will be filled by decree from the US Chamber of Commerce and the Business Round Table. It would be more honest than this farcical crap, and afterall:

"The executive of the modern state is but a committee for managing the common affairs of the bourgeoisie as a whole."

[Cleita]

184. Just like we need separation of church and state, we need

separation of corporation and state or we don't have a democratic republic as envisioned by the writers of the Constitution. It seems that clever lawyers should be able to impeach those Supreme Court justices who passed this for violating their oath of upholding the Constitution. If there is no such way of doing this then we are a complete fascist state. Hitler and Mussolini must be high fiving each other in Hell.

[BP2]

187. "Hello, Exxon? This is Sarah Palin. Listen, we need another $100 million for my campaign. Yeah,

just put it in the regular account. Todd is monitoring it."

"Yes, of course I'm going to re-enact offshore drilling in California
and the outer continental shelf when I swear in, in January. On day one.

"Consider it done."

:puke: :puke: :puke:

[Turbineguy]

188. The customer has the option

of not patronizing companies that contribute to candidates the customer does not like. That's sort of a supply-side view but it holds.

And in fact, it may not make any real difference anyway. Politicians are bought and paid for now.

[Wednesdays]

284. Many don't have an option

For example, I know several small towns where the presence of their Super Wal-mart has driven all local shops out of business, so much so that Wal-mart is the ONLY place to shop for ANYTHING.

So, when someone needs food for dinner, their "choices" are: drive 30 miles or more to a city, or pay a 300% mark-up at a convenience store (if there is one), or continue to fund Wal-Mart.

(edited to fix a typo)

[and-justice-for-all]

192. Corperations are NOT people!

There is no way that the general population can compete with cooperation's' campaign spending.

Thanks supreme court for fucking us over!!

[mvd]

241. Exactly right

To those who say it's a matter of "free speech," we already don't have unlimited free speech. The law was there for a reason: to limit corporate interference in what is supposed to be elections done by the people. Awful decision by the SC - we need to start now getting it back into place. On the bright side, Sotomayor voted with the liberal members.

[Autumn Colors]

194. Notice the framing .....

.... the word "FREES" in the headline as if the story is a positive one.

Yes, these poor corporations have finally been freed .... liberated from their electoral shackles.

What was that about the "liberal" media again???

[Wizard777]

197. Time to end Corporate personage.

[katty]

202. Fat Cat City just passed GO! sickening

[dbonds]

204. Time for pitchforks and torches

[hay rick]

215. Amen.

[totodeinhere]

207. This is a reminder of how important the SCOTUS is.

And here's the thing. We have two liberal justices, Stevens and Ginsburg, who are rumored to be considering retiring. If
either or both of them do intend to retire anytime soon, then they need to do it now, not later. If they wait until after the 2010 election there very well might be several more Republicans in the Senate who could make life difficult for President Obama's nominees. And if they wait until after the 2012 election, God forbid if Obama is defeated by a Republican, then we really have problems. We can't let that happen. While we still have 59 votes, now is the time for Obama to have the ability to appoint one or more new justices.

You had better believe that none of the conservatives on the court will retire before 2012 in hopes that Obama might lose and there will be a Republican president to appoint more conservative justices. At the very least, we need to maintain the court's ideological balance. It's bad already but we can't let it get any worse.

[chuckrocks]

223. i don't trust him

he'll just let the repugs pick the nominee anyways. what's the difference.

[totodeinhere]

259. I thought his first nominee was OK.

I would have preferred someone more progressive, but we could have done a lot worse than her.

[Turbineguy]

209. The stockmarket

seems to have improved on the news.....

[fascisthunter]

210. the Further Destruction of Democracy

the average tax payer's votes are now much more worthless. As long as we allow bribery, there will be no representation of average Americans and only representation of the wealthy elite.

Welcome to fascism.

[hay rick]

214. Yawn.

Just another catastrophic failure. Witnessing the corporate takeover of "health care reform" to date, it is difficult to imagine corporations having much more influence than they already have.

[ellie]

216. I can't believe

how upset I am about this. I am a little dizzy from my rage.

[dotymed]

512. I thought I was the

only one who was actually physically ill over this decision...

[varelse]

222. We're fucked

Goodbye, delusions of democracy.

[SirRevolutionary]

225. Thank you Supreme Court

This Emancipation Corporation will be nothing but excellent for us all!!

:toast: :party: :woohoo:
:sarcasm:

[valerief]

226. OF COURSE THEY DID. Fascism appears to be a one-way street.

And the traffic is blowing right by us!

[rem3006]

227. What I think They are

saying is that everyone gets to speak, either individually or collectively if they so choose. One argument is that a corporation is actually a collection of it's owners, the stock holders, who have a shared common interest. The argument is that as an interest group they have the same right to run political speech ads as do any other interest group from NARAL to NRA to Green Peace to Sierra Club to the AFL-CIO. This ruling will also free up unions to run issue ads withing 60 days of an election.

[Name removed]

239. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[glinda]

228. they just duct-taped the people's mouths shut

[reformist]

235. More like they've drowned it out!

We can scream all we want - it will be nothing compared to the megaphones the corporations will have!

[Paper Roses]

230. It has reached a point where I wait to see that the daily screw-up is.l

On top of everything else, this too?

[doc03]

236. For sale to highest bidder Washington D.C. n/t

[Don Draper]

237. Just when you thought it couldnt get worse......

We are sooooooo boned.

[SOS]

240. A proposal to restructure the US Congress in light of this decision

The 100 largest corporations each get a Senate seat.
The next largest 435 each get a House seat.

This will make no difference in legislation passed and will save us the bother of voting.

[bitchkitty]

245. Bloody freaking hell.

I can't imagine the horror that 2012 will become.

[Solly Mack]

246. and members of Congress make their wish list

1. New vacation/second/third/fourth homes in Maui, NY city, Malibu,Paris
2. New cars for all family members
3. Tuition paid for children
4. Stocks (lots and lots)
5. Job for spouse
6. Job for lover
7. Job for basement dwelling children that refuse to leave home
8. Guaranteed salary for the rest of life for all votes
....
....
....
....

and the people get the crumbs they can afford

[krabigirl]

247. :( horrible news

[cufford]

248. Game over

Game over...the foxes now OWN the hen house.

There is no hope left for this country. The people have no say.

[emsimon33]

250. It's the end of the Republic

At least it is no longer a sham!

[Joe the Liberal]

251. Nothing but bad news all this week.......

First that dimwitted, cookie cutter, wingnut Scott Brown manages to get elected in the bluest of states. Now the once historic seat that belong to JFK, John Quincy Adams and Ted Kennedy is now tainted and filled by your typical sleazeball republican.

Now this happens, The corporations already owned this country before, they always have but it was never official. Now it's official, What ever sliver of democracy this country had is now gone.

[theFrankFactor]

252. Campaign Finance Law to be Overhauled as Supreme Court Rules in Citizens United v. Federal Election

Source: OpenSecrets.org

The Supreme Court, in session this morning, is releasing its rulings on the landmark campaign finance case Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission.

Early reports indicate the court's rulings will indeed rewrite federal campaign finance law, particularly as it applies to corporate and union independent expenditures.

Capital Eye's Michael Beckel is busy preparing an analysis of the decision, so be sure to check back here later today.

Read more: http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2010/01/supreme-court-rules-in-citizen.html

---

http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/09pdf/08-205.pdf

http://www.scotusblog.com/2010/01/liveblog-opinions-1-21-10/

http://www.scotusblog.com/

This is nuclear in proportions.

[zeemike]

253. So the question is what are progressives going to do now.

Sit back and take it up the ass?
If we don't get off our ass and get to the streets it is all over for any hope of change.

[safeinOhio]

254. right now the only counter to this is

to support Unions and the rights of unions to organize. Next would be a constitutional amendment.

[zeemike]

281. Well if that is all we can do then I will never see it

And neither will you.

[ShockediSay]

255. Might as well broadcasst to the world that our government is to be Corporate Fascist Funded

Look it up

Fascist governments took money and power from the right wing

and corporations behind them.

Today in our country, Corporations control what we read, what we hear

on the radio, what we see on TV, in fact all of our media with the pos

sible exception of some small element of the net which they will

eliminate as did China and Tehran.

Our only chance is to IMPEACH those justices who were affiliated with

the Fascistly founded Federalist Society, thereby puting thoses Justices

squarely in violation of the Federal Judicial Code of Ethics requiring

avoidance of activities having the appearance of partiality.

THIS IS CLEARLY A FASCIST COUNTRY NOW.

[zeemike]

280. Well I agree with you.

And we should just admit to that truth and then do something about it.

[grahamhgreen]

256. It's amendment time, now!

[Gregorian]

257. Isn't this like giving some people more voting power than others?

How is campaign finance by corporations constitutional?

Someone owns a corporation. They can sway an election through their contributions. That same person can also contribute to the same campaign.

There is a disconnect, I believe. Money IS A VOTE. It may not be a ballot vote, and it may even be more significant and powerful than a ballot vote.

What we need is election reform where money is not part of the process.

[aSpeckofDust]

267. They can also blackmail their employees to vote one way or be fired. N/t

[Gregorian]

258. No my vote really doesn't count.

That is exactly what this does. And unfortunately the legal arguments that obviously disagree are like slowly boiling water that has lead all the way up to a dead Democracy.

[Earth_First]

261. This is some bizzaro-world sh*t right here! n/t

[alp227]

265. What a week of political suckery

A Republican wins Ted Kennedy's former Senate seat, and now this? This year's election will be so corrupt.

I first heard about this decision on NPR's http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=122818461">Talk of the Nation. One caller (IIRC) said that this decision might allow "multi-national" corporations (with operations abroad) contributing to American campaigns. Back in 1996 Bill Clinton found himself in hot water for getting illegal contributions from the Chinese. (Non-citizens are not allowed to donate to US political campaigns).

[Generator]

268. Final nail in the coffin of the American experiment

It's over folks. (we can't even get health care now-can you imagine any of our for profit for someone wars EVER ending?) My daughter is only ten and she's already planning to move to another country when she grows up. Too late for us.

[ChromeFoundry]

269. welcome to the corporate states of america. n/t

[Bluebear]

271. Ah, full fascism at last!

[truthisfreedom]

273. Time for new law.

[ooglymoogly]

274. For those of you who think we live in a democracy, you just

got your head handed to you on a platinum card platter.

[humbled_opinion]

287. JUST IN TIME FOR SCOTT BROWN

Nice, WTF is going on in DC..... Where is the public outrage... Its past time for a Progressive march screw this. If we don't have Democrats standing up against this we are screwed.

I am so disillusioned I don't even know where to start.

[kdsimantel]

292. This sucks..... but........

and this may sound too Pollyanish ..... what if as progressives we create organizations/corporations (scary word) to provide person hood for our philosophies? That may be the way left to maintain our rights. Just a thought.

[wickerwoman]

491. Where's the money going to come from?

And do you honestly think a progressive "corporation" could compete against the insurance, pharmaceutical, agriculture and defense industries? It will never be a level playing field and that's not even getting into the fact that foreign entities can now invest in American politics by donating to candidates. All of us banded together couldn't take on an Enron let alone an Enron and Halliburton and Monsanto and Blackwater and the credit card companies.

[winyanstaz]

293. This is the end of justice for sure......

We are so screwed by this government.

[dcsmart]

296. Great...very cool

:bounce: :toast: :party: :beer:



just kidding...


:argh: :nuke: :grr: :wow: :banghead:




time to: :rant: :spank:

[vw-fixer]

300. When it rains . . .

it pours? This week has quite literally ushered in the "perfect storm." And I understand that Schumer is blowing a gasket.

[Politicub]

304. Say hello to the company-backed candidate - brought to you by GE

[AlphaCentauri]

305. So now we can exchange discount coupons for votes?

[SalviaBlue]

307. So, non-American trans-national corporations get to vote.

Great. :puke:

[dana_b]

308. I am at a loss

this is a horrible ruling that most people won't even be aware of. The ramifications are terrible and I can't see politician ever caring again about what we say or want.

[logosoco]

309. This is sooooo backwards!

I don't even know what to say. ANd this is HUGE, yet most people will not really understand the impact. But they will be talking about Edwards child.

I took a class on the Constitution a few years back. Right after the SCOTUS put Bush in office. Now I will use that information to tell my grandsons that once upon a time in this country we had a chance. But they took it away. Sold it to the highest bidder. What a shame.

[TransitJohn]

310. END CORPORATE PERSONHOOD NOW!

Can it be any clearer?

[JerseygirlCT]

311. Cause those poor corporations have no say in our gov't., right?

Oh brother.

[Ilsa]

313. You are nott a person unless you are able to DIE! Not go bankrupt, but Die! nt

[Sal Minella]

432. I wonder if the Xtian Wackazoids see some mystical relationship

between fetuses and corporations?

How is a clump of cells similar to a clump of overpaid white executives in silk suits?

[colsohlibgal]

315. Heil Roberts!

What is just incredibly galling is that wing nuts constantly gripe about "activist judges". Obviously though they are fine with it if they like the activism. This is no surprise, it's been greased for some time.

Get ready for President Palin by golly. The takeover will proceed as scheduled. It's going to take a serious attitude change in high places, a really active and ultra vocal populace, and some drastic measures to turn this boat around.

[mistertrickster]

317. If 1st Amendment rights apply to a corporation, then how about the 2nd Amendment?

A corporation should be able to keep and bear arms.

That would make sense if a corporation were a person, which is the whole point--THEY'RE NOT!

[wolfgangmo]

318. And America's bold experiment in democracy moves on to it's next stage.

One dollar = 1 vote.

[MilesColtrane]

321. If the board of Exxon/Mobil is going to pick the next President they'll want...

a total stooge, someone who looks good, but is anti-government, and so pro-business that they make Bush look like a tree hugging peacenik.

America, get ready for President Rick Perry!!

[makemyday]

323. Money Talks

In the government of the people, by the people and for the people, it's nice to know that SCOTUS is looking out for the "people." (NOT)

I don't know about you, but (opensecrets.org) over half (maybe even most) of the contributions to finance the campaign for the representative from my district come from people and organizations located outside of my district. I'm sure the representative (Steny H Hoyer) represents those contributors much more aggressively than he does the voters who live and vote in his district.

I don't know if the campaign advertising dollars related to the SCOTUS decision are included in the amounts shown at opensecrets.org, but, in my opinion, corporations do not equal people, free speech does not equal money and donations to candidates from outside the voting district detract from the representation of the voters in the district.

[Odin2005]

327. Democracy is dead.

:cry:

[Autumn]

330. We are fucked

might as well fucking hang it up.:grr:

[pattmarty]

332. History may show that this was the final straw in the fall of Democracy.....

.......in the United States. Everyone here knows this will make things much worse with getting elected officials to represent "human" citizens.

[dbonds]

360. The people still has the ultimate power. It just depends on how much they want to fight.

[pattmarty]

375. The ONLY hope I have now is if somehow the saner liberals and...............

..............conservatives unite to fight corporations and banks/insurance companies. It's possible but I don't thing very likely. Welcome to fascism 2.0. I'm 63 and I won't have to live through the bullshit, but my kids and stepsons will and I feel sorry for them and all the younger people. "Sorry, but you're fucked".

[Butch350]

336. Why Vote anymore - let Corporate America decide...

...hey Supreme (joke) Court your check from corp america is in the mail!

[CanonRay]

337. Death of Democracy Day

A modest proposal for a new Federal holiday. January 21, Death of Democracy Day!

[defendandprotect]

338. We'll need a Constitutional amendment to put corps back in the box . . !!!

Right Wing Supreme Court is disgusting and think we need to either

increase the numbers with liberal packing -- or start recalling these fascists!!

[grahamhgreen]

352. Thom Hartman has a good, simple change to the 14th amendment

Simply add the word 'natural' before the word 'persons', which would mean that corporations ('persons') no longer have the same rights as people ('natural persons'), and can be regulated as we see fit. This should annul todays judgment as these rights are being granted to corporations on the ground that they have the same rights as 'persons'.

[Overseas]

484. Yes I think it's a great idea too. //nt

[AtheistCrusader]

346. Thomas and Breyer dissented LOL

That is truly funny. Well, each dissented in part, but they were the strongest against. Thomas of all people.

Adjudged to be AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, and case REMANDED. Kennedy, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Roberts, C. J., and Scalia and Alito, JJ., joined, in which Thomas, J., joined as to all but Part IV, and in which Stevens, Ginsburg, Breyer, and Sotomayor, JJ., joined as to Part IV. Roberts, C. J., filed a concurring opinion, in which Alito, J., joined. Scalia, J., filed a concurring opinion, in which Alito, J., joined, and in which Thomas, J., joined in part. Stevens, J., filed an opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part, in which Ginsburg, Breyer, and Sotomayor, JJ., joined. Thomas, J., filed an opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part.

[sulphurdunn]

356. This is absolutely the worst SCOTUS

ruling since Dred Scott and will have far more catastrophic consequences unless the liberal wing of the Democratic party takes control from its conservative wing... and quickly.

[tonysam]

386. Bush v. Gore was worse

So was the Paula Jones phony baloney decision. BOTH rulings were subversions of democracy.

[FVZA_Colonel]

409. Bush v. Gore set things up so that this ruling would happen.

Combined with everything else that has come from the Court since Bush packed it, I'd say that was worse, though this may be the worst case to stem from Bush v. Gore.

[dbonds]

357. "Frees Firms" which really means "removes protection against fascism"

[lanlady]

365. Why hold elections anymore?

Let's just cut to the chase and give out higher office to the highest bidder. Want a US Senate seat? Go to ebay.

And apart from Republicans who are plenty stupid, is anyone dumb enough to think that unions are on an even playing field in this? I think not, so we may as well open the bidding for higher office to Fortune 500 only.

[Fire1]

372. It's a wrap, folks. n/t

[KansDem]

387. Yeah, anyone going to the wrap party?

I know I could use a few...:hangover:

[Fire1]

414. Who's gonna be the next puppet? Palin? Tyra Banks maybe?

[SemiCharmedQuark]

376. Wow! 5-4 decision! Who didn't see *that* coming!?

[robertpaulsen]

390. The Only Solution: CONSTITUTIONAL FUCKING AMENDMENT!!!

We need one to overturn this decision and also overturn Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad from 1886.

BAN CORPORATE PERSONHOOD!

[quaker bill]

396. I think we need to

start requiring our politicians to dress up like race car drivers, with logos for all the corporations backing them in plain sight.

[Hekate]

401. Ironically, I am at this moment sitting through a required Ethics for Public Officials class

It's quite comprehensive and the putative penalties for violating the public trust are severe.

But the SCOTUS says ethics are just for us little people.

Hekate
:argh:

[Enthusiast]

407. This is the result of electing

Republicans-a fascist state.

[Number_Six]

411. Fascism 101!

n/t

[Enthusiast]

412. Welcome to fascist America.

I didn't think these RW fucks were even this corrupt. Now this is very serious. This country was in jeopardy before, now.....

[kurtzapril4]

413. Corporate limits on campaign spending

We are fucked. Well and truly fucked.

[Politicub]

417. I believe the conservative bloc will be busted during Obama's term

and he will replace Scalia, Thomas or Roberts with a liberal.

Yes, I know Roberts is relatively young, but anything is possible.

And sometimes hope is all that we have.

[m_anders]

419. NEXT: Supreme Court rules one-person one-vote violates equal protection for corporate owners

New rules require voting strength to be wealth-based

[reformist]

434. Stevens actually mentions this in his dissent!

"Under the majority’s view, I suppose it may be a First Amendment problem that corporations are not permitted to vote, given that voting is, among other things, a form of speech."

[newspeak]

424. corporations have too much power as it is and they have little to no

responsibility. During the spanish american war soldiers died from tainted beef--the company knew that it sold beef that was tainted to the US government. They received a mere fine for killing those soldiers. Let's say a corporation, oh in the auto industry, has a meeting before shipping it's new autos to the public and find a defect--they discuss how much money it will cost to fix the defect or how much they will fork over to the families who have lost loved ones from the defect. So, they decide that they'll lose less money by paying the families. Now if a sniper on top of a building randomly shoots people, people he doesn't even know, he is arrested and charged with murder; but, a board who has decided that because of their shitty product some people are going to die, know it--nothing happens to them. Isn't it premeditated murder, when you know that your product is going to harm someone, they don't know who it will be just like the sniper doesn't know the people he's shooting, but the profit is worth more than the life?

All you have to do is see how much those corporations have gotten away with in Iraq. Murder-no problem; rape-nada; shoddy electrical work causing deaths-let's slap their widdle hands.

See corporations are persons when it benefits them; and apparently, non-persons when it doesn't. TAKE THEIR PERSONHOOD AWAY!

And, what was stated above-the ceo is a person, each boardmember is a person; but a corporation is not a person; therefore, should not have as much rights or status as a person. The boardmembers and the ceo should have as much rights as we are given, as individuals; so, they can donate their money to their candidates, but not in the name of the corporation-simple as that.

[gtar100]

426. Self-interest trumps intelligence once again.

Not surprised but my heart is aching with one disappointment after another.

[barb162]

428. What stops a foreign corp from buying a US corp and putting

$$$$$$$$$$ into a campaign? This is the end of democracy as we know it. The corporations have officially won. The voters become meaningless.

[Kolesar]

458. Or a "soveriegn wealth fund" like the Saudi rulers have? ... eom

[pokercat999]

431. GOOD!

When finally even the illusion of freedom and democracy are gone the lazy and stupid americans might get off their fat asses and do something about it.

[gristy]

438. I was thinking the same thing

This is going to open some eyes and maybe some minds.

[Fire1]

454. Ditto. n/t

[Luciferous]

437. Fucking ridiculous... they just keep selling us out to these

goddamn corporations.

[proud patriot]

439. completely fucked up

:grr:

[BrianDude]

440. One Dollar One Vote

This means that they can TAX middle class Americans to support their corporate agenda! It is bad enough that these effete snobs of privilege make more money in one day than the average American earns in a year. Now they want to finance their K-STREET operations out of MY POCKET! Who believes the money will come from shareholders? No it will come from higher prices for their goods/services and/or a reduction in the quality and quantity per unit price of such goods and services!

This is "TAXATION WITHOUT REPRESENTATION"! Where are these self righteous "Tea Baggers"?

[newspeak]

517. I thought of that "taxation without representation."

I don't know if many people know the implications of this decision. ANY candidate who introduces regulations for the bank, environment, safety, labor, is basically FEKKED, because the corporations can flow billions to stooges that can undo any regulatory bill. You can kiss food and water safety, air quality, labor safety, consumer safety; and any other bill that protects the american people from sociopathic corporations that put profit over people's lives. This country is in serious jeopardy of having the innocent thrown in the insane asylum, while the heads of the asylum are truly mentally psychopathically unsound.

It was bad enough when we had to fight to be heard over the corporate influence, and that included influence by MSM--but now the people will be drowned out. Yes, there will be no representation and we, as a people, will become servants of corporate interests--our wars may be sold as nationalistic BS, but we'll being fighting for corporate power and stealing resources from other countries. The United States of America will be a front for every corporate interest (it is somewhat now, but wait until they blatantly tell us that we are nothing but inconsequential slaves).

And foreign interest? There are very wealthy people who own a majority of stock in corporations, like Time-Warner (Saudi Arabia). What influence will they have on our government and over us, since basically we've just been told that our representation is LESS that corporate interests, and that will include foreign interests.

Again, it's time to visit that little mistake from 1907 and take personhood away from corporations. At one time California had a law that stated that a corporation could be disbanded if it harmed the welfare of the people or of a community. The only way to reign in such blatant bribing, is to revisit personhood.

[Caretha]

441. Excuse me while I weep

http://www.civilwarartillery.com/sounds/taps.wav

[D23MIURG23]

442. As if congress wasn't already owned. What a terrible decision.n/t

[bamacrat]

446. And the too tan man Boehner said it was a good thing and a victory for the first ammendment.

Bullshit. Now this is just blatant corporatism. Welcome to the United Corporations of America. Fuck this.

[coti]

448. This is extremely bad.

They still can't contribute directly to candidates but this will allow them to use their primary weapon- money- to directly influence our political discourse.

[FailureToCommunicate]

452. Right. That's Massachusetts' hangover today. Too much last minute Tea Party

spending. (And yeah, I know Coakley ran a lousy campaign, blah, blah. I was part of it)

[Fire1sKid]

449. Washington D.C.'s new look!!!

[WoodyM]

456. When George Bush was first elected

I feared him. And my fears were justified but I feared more than anything his appointing judges to the Supreme Court. This will hurt us longer than any other thing he inflicted on us.

[Jefferson23]

459. Senator Schumer and Van Hollen on SCOTUS decision, watch the c-span video:

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled against regulations that limit how corporations and unions can finance federal U.S. elections. Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Rep. Van Hollen (D-MD) spoke to reporters at the Capitol to respond to the decision.
Washington, DC : 21 min.

http://www.c-span.org/Watch/Media/2010/01/21/HP/A/28697/Sen+Schumer+DNY+Rep+Van+Hollen+DMD+on+Supreme+Court+Campaign+Finance+Decision.aspx

[jeanmarc]

462. Democracy is dead today

People are not smart enough today to know a corporate ad. Now they are going to get a ton of them. The line between commercial and real television show will also blur even more than it is now.

We will have the most ill-informed public thinking they have a vote. Their vote is gone.

[bdamomma]

463. just absolutely sucks.

should I say pitchforks and torches time yet????:hide:

[underpants]

464. Just ridiculous. The whole story of this-the Tea Baggers are exposed as frauds

and THEY get what their masters could have only dreamed about

[KILL THE WISE ONE]

470. but they are too stupid to care

They helped bring down the country they were wanting to save. While they railed against Government, when most of them cash their Government social security checks, and use their Medicare that they do not even know is Government Heath care.

The safest way is be prepared to "BOW DOWN BEFORE YOUR COOPERATE MASTERS "

STOP PUSHING GUN CONTROL .... BUY THEM .... LEARN HOW TO USE THEM !

[Maineman]

465. "If you can keep it"

Corporations, which are legal structures only, can take their headquarters off shore, out-source labor to foreign shores, avoid taxes, and be controlled by foreign nationals or foreign governments can now purchase U.S. politicians outright. The Supreme Court Decision must not stand. It must be overturned immediately. Was it Thomas Jefferson who said that "you (we) have a republic, IF YOU CAN KEEP IT". We just lost it, although it was already mostly gone. We can get it back. It is time to get serious, and seriously active.

See reclaimdemocracy.org
See savedemocracy.net

I am sure there are more

[ElsewheresDaughter]

466. Now tell me that the corps didn't have something to do with Tuesday' election

[rasputin1952]

467. Today is the day when Congress should prepare an Amendment

to The Constitution, banning corporate money from the system. It would be one hell of a fight...but it can be done.

One citizens actually realize that they just lost their Right to vote w/o being under duress...and the losses will mount under the corporate bought pols, pressure upon the States would be immense.

To me, the SCotUS just handed the throttle of power over to nothing more than the monied interests of this nation...and no nation has ever survived a situation under those conditions.

[reformist]

468. Yes. If you aren't eligible to vote, you can't give money to candidates - Period!

[defendandprotect]

475. It's also a threat re foreign interests/owners . . .

[KILL THE WISE ONE]

473. TWO SOLUTIONS A) new law cooperations are not people.

b) if cooperations are people then they must pay individual income tax rates. or it fails the equal protection under the law.

[unkachuck]

477. ah, the fascists....

....have given even greater control of our electoral process and thus government (if that's possible) to their fascist buddies....

"...overturned a 20-year-old ruling that said corporations can be prohibited from using money from their general treasuries to pay for campaign ads."

....the difference?....look around, the fascists are serious, we are not....

[d_b]

480. is it pitchforks and torches yet?

[budkin]

482. Man this is a total nightmare and yet another consequence of the Bush re-selection

[Divine Discontent]

533. Sandra O'Connor should have felt some immense GUILT and held on til B*sh was out of office so a Dem

could have selected her spot. And, had Kerry rightfully won the election, as Ohio was a farce to say the LEAST - Rehnquist would have been replaced by a liberal also!!!

so amazing that instead we get Alito and Roberts... barf.

[donheld]

485. GOD DAMN!

[24601]

488. Thankfully, the defense and fate of the 1st Amendment doesn't

rely on the posters to this thread.

"Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech we like that comes from groups we approve of...."

[Truth2Tell]

492. Corporations aren't people. Why do you think

they deserve the same rights as you and me? Maybe you think they deserve the right to vote too? :shrug:

[dotymed]

513. Sadly,

with this "decision", corporations DID get the right to vote...

[24601]

526. Fine - then no longer create them as legal persons under state

laws and forget about prosecuting them for misdeeds since, after all, that aren't real people. Ask the former employees of Arthur Anderson, where the conviction was overturned but the damage to the corporation was irreversible.

And ponder this - a corporation is created by real people, like a union. They are bound by a common purpose, like a union. As long as they are assembled peacefully, their collective voice is no less valid.

Although this case was about independent expenditures, there IS a way to clean up campaigns - make it a requirement that if you want to contribute to a campaign, you have to be eligible to vote in that election.

[Caretha]

504. You are such a tool

[jwirr]

489. 5-4 who voted for the corporations to take over?

[AsahinaKimi]

496. Corporate Fascism

Within a few years the Corporations will own and run everything. There may no longer be a President of the United States, or if there is, he or she will be a sock puppet. Think of every science fiction story you know where the Corporations run everying...

I suppose JUDGE DREDD will be next...

"I AM THE LAW!"

[Adenoid_Hynkel]

500. Meanwhile top stories on yahoo

- Sharapova's dress worst of Australian Open
- China teen a hero for crime
- Best 'SNL' movies
- Religious items cause a scare

yep, nothing to see here

[fasttense]

510. Crap, the Supremes are dancing for their masters and it's not We The People. n/t

[workinclasszero]

515. We are fucked now

Corporate fascism has won.

Soon President Palin along with her allies Beck, Limbaugh, Bachmann, Hanitty etc will rule this country with an iron fist. I wish I could move to a civilized country like Canada but I guess its my fate to watch the once greatest country on the face of the earth commit suicide and go straight to hell drowning in greed and avarice.

And all the way there the american Taliban will be saying how great it all is. Serfdom to our corporate masters is god's will, you dirty heathen democrats!:puke:

Keep crankin out those jesus gun's peeps cause theres lots more war to come! These holy wars keep our corporate masters in business don't cha know?

[stellad]

516. “It is a jolt to the legal system when you overrule a precedent.” - John Roberts told the Senate

at his 2005 nomination hearing.

What a liar!

[Divine Discontent]

534. "What a liar!" - AMEN! the things the conservatives are doing is so offensively legislating politc

from the bench.

[Zorra]

523. President Obama needs to issue a Presidential Order nullifying this SCOTUS decision.

This decision will open the door for foreign governments/corporations to covertly pay, through an American front company, billions of dollars to advertise for the election of any candidates they choose.

There's no possible way to completely and effectively regulate corporate cash in order to prevent this type of campaign manipulation by foreign entities.

(Thanks to NJMaverick for posting the problem of foreign involvement in campaign advertising in GD)

[wordpix]

530. why not? * issued HIS signing statements & no one (but DU) said "boo" - why not Obama