SCOTUS ruling allows Saudi & Chinese big money to buy U.S. elections

[clear eye]

Manchurian Candidates:
Supreme Court allows China and others unlimited spending in US elections
By Greg Palast, Thursday, January 21, 2010

In today's Supreme Court decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, the Court ruled that corporations should be treated the same as "natural persons", i.e. humans...The ruling, which junks federal laws that now bar corporations from stuffing campaign coffers, will not, as progressives fear, cause an avalanche of corporate cash into politics. Sadly, that's already happened...

The Court's decision is far, far more dangerous to U.S. democracy. Think: Manchurian candidates.

I'm losing sleep over the millions — or billions — of dollars that could flood into our elections from ARAMCO, the Saudi Oil corporation's U.S. unit; or from the maker of "New Order" fashions, the Chinese People's Liberation Army. Or from Bin Laden Construction corporation. Or Bin Laden Destruction Corporation...

under today's Supreme Court ruling that corporations can support candidates without limit, there is nothing that stops, say, a Delaware-incorporated handmaiden of the Burmese junta from picking a Congressman or two with a cache of loot masked by a corporate alias.

...Under the Court's new rules, progressive list serves won't stand a chance against the resources of new "citizens" such as CNOOC, the China National Offshore Oil Corporation. Maybe UBS (United Bank of Switzerland), which faces U.S. criminal prosecution and a billion-dollar fine for fraud, might be tempted to invest in a few Senate seats. As would XYZ Corporation, whose owners remain hidden by "street names."

Read more.

Palast also reminds us that the 2 million donations that initially made the Obama candidacy viable won't hold a candle to the potential injection of int'l wealth into the process in the future.

[AlinPA]

1. Congressional and senate fundraising committees (DCCC, etc) cannot compete with

the billions we will see. A republican presidential candidate will easily start with several billions.

[fascisthunter]

2. someone tell me how this could be Constitutional?

[clear eye]

6. It's Constitutional b/c SCOTUS has said so.

Under our Constitution, they are the final arbiters.

Doesn't make sense to me either, except as an indicator of corruption or cowardice.

[David Zephyr]

3. A Saudi billionaire is buying a big chunk of Murdoch's News Corp.

The Saudis owned the Washington Times before the "Reverend" Moon bought it from them.

[BunkerHill24]

4. Maybe mixing this with Saudi Arabia and China will have more people

pay attention. Oh, and maybe so we can now have all Muslim haters pay attention.


on edit: maybe i should of used this :sarcasm:

[PATRICK]

5. The bright side

This way we get that some of that overseas money back, unless they dun us higher prices for gas and poisoned dogfood, flammable shirts and terminator toddler toys.

It could even signal an end to the drug war with a rebate paid to American PR businesses from their losses in not being allowed to advertise crack and heroin.

[donheld]

7. Osama Bin Laden's rich maybe he'll buy a Senator or two