We Have a RIGHT to PROTEST the Election Results

[OlympicBrian]

A Constitutional amendment turning back the recent Citizens United Supreme Court decision has been proposed. The Citizens United decision allows unlimited, anonymous, and potentially foreign money into political organizations--to influence both political ads, and lawmaking, via lobbyists. However, such an amendment obviously will not come fast enough to ensure fairness for this election (nor could the Congress act in time). So it is up to us, the people.

Unfortunately, we are left completely open and unprotected--this danger creeps into the heart of our nation at this very moment. In fact, the US Chamber of Commerce--in lockstep with the Republicans--is hard at work funneling secret money to political ads, and is making great plans to vastly expand the influence of Republican and corporate control after the election. Since the Chamber is the worlds largest lobbying organization, they will immediately be on the attack after the election--to force their radical agenda, and spoon-feed laws into being. The Chamber recently kicked off a campaign to change a law which prevents foreign corrupt practices. And that's just the start. Look at the vast amount of Chamber money, which will only skyrocket due to CU:

http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/top.php?indexType=s

What's remarkable is 80 percent of the public is against the CU decision! How many issues do the American people agree on to such a large degree? The answer is few--Americans stand firmly against the CU atrocity.

"Americans of both parties overwhelmingly oppose a Supreme Court ruling that allows corporations and unions to spend as much as they want on political campaigns, and most favor new limits on such spending, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/17/AR2010021701151.html

So, the upcoming election is based on a fundamental premise that 80 percent of Americans disagree with. That's shocking! But there is something we can do about it, right away.

First and foremost, go out and vote. But then, once the votes are counted, we have it WITHIN OUR RIGHTS to reject the outcomes of elections tainted by money 80 percent of us reject. That includes, the potential Republican landslide, funded through this abomination.

So what we need is a big protest. A progressive Secretary of State must REFUSE TO CERTIFY the results of the elections for a state. Sure, they might be fired, but it would make the CU issue even more visible. At the same time, Americans could hold massive revolts against the election results, since so many of them agree that the results are based on the flawed premise of tainted money in elections.

Will we, as the governed, come forward, along with a brave patriot Secretary of State? This may be our last chance to make a stand before it is too late.

"It is the duty of the governed, to endeavour to rectify the mistake, and appease the passion. They have not at first any other right, than to represent their grievances, and to pray for redress, unless an emergence is so pressing, as not to allow time for receiving an answer to their applications which rarely happens. If their applications are disregarded, then that kind of position becomes justifiable, which can be made without breaking the laws, or disturbing the public peace. This consists in the prevention of the oppressors reaping advantage from their oppressions, and not in their punishment. For experience may teach them what reason did not; and harsh methods, cannot be proper, till milder ones have failed.

If at length it become undoubted, that an inveterate resolution is formed to annihilate the liberties of the governed, the English history affords frequent examples of resistance by force. What particular circumstances will in any future case justify such resistance, can never be ascertained till they happen. Perhaps it may be allowable to say, generally, that it never can be justifiable, until the people are FULLY CONVINCED, that any further sub-mission will be destructive to their happiness."

- John Dickinson, The Pennsylvania Farmer's Remedy, 1768.

[msongs]

1. only individual human beings registered to vote should be allowed to give to campaigns & THOSE only

in the jurisdiction that will be served by the candidate for whom they donate.

[GreenPartyVoter]

2. Or we switch to public monies only and no one gets to donate at all.

[cherokeeprogressive]

4. +1000

[LARED]

3. You want people to vote and then protest the election

they just voted in? That does not seem to make much sense to me

Last time I checked unions and corporations don't vote, so it seems sort of foolish to protest election results because they gave money to a particular party.

[OlympicBrian]

5. Yes, exactly, and I don't follow your logic

"Last time I checked unions and corporations don't vote, so it seems sort of foolish to protest election results because they gave money to a particular party."

The above is exactly why you should be concerned ^^^ big money trumps your vote.

First, your vote only counts to get someone in office--and this is cast, depending on your opinion amidst the multitudes of phoney attack ads you're now exposed to.

Next, it's not donations to a particular party, but rather those through political organizations--the ones affected by the CU decision, such as the US Chamber of Commerce (who so happen to be the ones running the attack ads.)

Finally, the reason for the protest is because corporations are buying out the voters via attack ads, and then later Congressional votes via lobbying--with unlimited, anonymous money.

[OlympicBrian]

6. kick

Time for action!

[OlympicBrian]

7. kick