Supreme Court rejects corporate campaign spending limits

[EpyonXero]

In a high profile race like a presidential election this , hopefully, wouldnt be an issue because it would be all over the news if Haliburton gave a candidate $100M. Its the lower profile, congressional elections where this is dangerous. It wouldnt be hard for a company or a few companies with a common interest to buy seats in congress to get their own way. Who needs lobbyists when corporate sponsorship is now legal.

[derf]

Originally Posted by EpyonXero

In a high profile race like a presidential election this , hopefully, wouldnt be an issue because it would be all over the news if Haliburton gave a candidate $100M. Its the lower profile, congressional elections where this is dangerous. It wouldnt be hard for a company or a few companies with a common interest to buy seats in congress to get their own way. Who needs lobbyists when corporate sponsorship is now legal.

Naw that could never happen

[goof2]

Originally Posted by EpyonXero

In a high profile race like a presidential election this , hopefully, wouldnt be an issue because it would be all over the news if Haliburton gave a candidate $100M. Its the lower profile, congressional elections where this is dangerous. It wouldnt be hard for a company or a few companies with a common interest to buy seats in congress to get their own way. Who needs lobbyists when corporate sponsorship is now legal.

All elections have checks and balances in the form of the opposing candidate(s). If Haliburton gives $50k to a candidate you can bet those running against that candidate will make some noise about it.

[derf]

Originally Posted by goof2

All elections have checks and balances in the form of the opposing candidate(s). If Haliburton gives $50k to a candidate you can bet those running against that candidate will make some noise about it.

Yeh except $50m gives me way more time and ability to talk shit and scream about how bad you are. Plus we sheeple don't care what you really say just how often we hear what we want to hear.

[goof2]

Originally Posted by derf

Yeh except $50m gives me way more time and ability to talk shit and scream about how bad you are. Plus we sheeple don't care what you really say just how often we hear what we want to hear.

If that $50m comes from an unpopular place the time and ability to talk shit and scream doesn't matter once people discount you and stop listening for being a corporate shill. Either way, a corporation is a legal entity entitled to free speech regardless of the effect of this decision will have.

[EpyonXero]

Originally Posted by goof2

All elections have checks and balances in the form of the opposing candidate(s). If Haliburton gives $50k to a candidate you can bet those running against that candidate will make some noise about it.

No, now the opposing candidate will have to find his own corporate sponsorship to compete.

[goof2]

Originally Posted by EpyonXero

No, now the opposing candidate will have to find his own corporate sponsorship to compete.

That too, but that in no way prevents them from calling in to question their opponent's motives for accepting however much from whatever company. I don't care what the amount is, how much of a chance does a candidate have if they accept large sums from Haliburton, Citgo, and Blackwater (now Xe)? In most areas of the country the answer is not much of one. The money itself is a form of speech, but the source of the money also makes a statement.

[derf]

Originally Posted by goof2

That too, but that in no way prevents them from calling in to question their opponent's motives for accepting however much from whatever company. I don't care what the amount is, how much of a chance does a candidate have if they accept large sums from Haliburton, Citgo, and Blackwater (now Xe)? In most areas of the country the answer is not much of one. The money itself is a form of speech, but the source of the money also makes a statement.

No but What about At&T who want to control a certain frequency spectrum? Or McDonalds who wants to fatten you up to use in their new people burger? Or Walmart who doesnt want to see the federal minium wage increased?

I mean who hates walmart? People that don't live near one?

All i'm saying is that politicians just follow the money

[goof2]

Originally Posted by derf

No but What about At&T who want to control a certain frequency spectrum? Or McDonalds who wants to fatten you up to use in their new people burger? Or Walmart who doesnt want to see the federal minium wage increased?

I mean who hates walmart? People that don't live near one?

All i'm saying is that politicians just follow the money

Sounds like a problem with politicians, not money.

[askmrjesus]

Originally Posted by Smittie61984

Corporations can have their entire business destroyed (where PEOPLE from the janitor to the CEO can lose jobs) through legislation from a congressman. I say they should have some say so in what the fuck happens in DC.

They do. It's called voting.

Originally Posted by Smittie61984

Besides plenty of businesses and organizations buy there way as it is now.

So let's make a bad situation even worse?

Free speech my ass. This ruling is an abomination and a fucking disaster for this country.

I think some of you people have completely lost your minds. Do you really believe that any entity should have a bigger say in Government than you do, simply because they have more money than you do?

Everyone favor of this ruling, please PM me your address, and I'll send you a free "I'm A Moron, Please Ass Rape Me" t-shirt.

Any hope we may have had, of turning around the corrupt and bullshit way our government is run, has died, and you're all yelling hooray for free speech.

Fucking unbelievable.

JC