So let me see if I have this straight (SCOTUS decision)

[LearnedHand]

http://www.npr.org/templates/player/mediaPlayer.html?action=1&t=1&islist=false&id=122823118&m=122823427

Today on "All Things Considered," Newt Gingrich said this: "If you're gonna retain Constitutional freedoms, allow people to criticize their politicians effectively, allow them to be engaged effectively, you really want to be engaged in allowing the maximum amount of resources to be in politics, not the minimum....The reform we need is to liberate the people to criticize their politicians."

So:

If unrestricted spending by corporations = being liberated to freely criticize my politician

then

The sum total of my assets = the amount of criticism I can level on my politician


Do I have that logic about right? :facepalm: Gives a whole new meaning to the old saw, "Freedom ain't free," doesn't it?

(Edited to undisappear a word in the quote.)

[tekisui]

1. More money means louder more secure voice.

Those in poverty are mutes in the eyes of the Supreme Court and in the halls of Congress.

[LearnedHand]

3. Exactly right

So now it's enshrined into our law: The less money you have, the less of a voice you have.

[gkhouston]

2. or, "Justice may be blind, but it can smell money". n/t

[LearnedHand]

4. OMG, I haven't heard that one

:rofl:

If that's not a bumpersticker, it needs to be.

[coti]

5. Right. nt

[LearnedHand]

6. Wonder if we can ever unring this egg or unscramble this bell?

At a minimum, we've waltzed directly back into the Guilded Age.