Supreme Court rules key parts of McCain-Feingold Act Unconstitutional

[montgb]

^^^ Absolutely. In my opinion, this isn't a right vs left discussion (despite how the supreme court voted).

[1SICKLEX]

Bottom line, money talks, bull**** runs the marathon Just a matter of time before a speech sounds like this;

My fellow Americans, I come to you drinking this refreshing gatorade and I had a great ride up here in a wonderful new Cadillac CTS that is offering great lease rates with qualified buyers. I must say that gas prices are down and I exclusively use Shell V-power b/c it has additional additives to make the CTS drive faster. Now as you know we are having issues with China, a beautiful country that Delta does fly too non-stop. Their first class seating is immense. Americans have also been worried about campaign contributions, lobbyists and corporation control. I've even texted fellow Americans from my new iPhone 5G, a great phone with over 1 billion apps. Now while texting, I was eating the delicious new Bigger Mac from McDonalds, a 4 lbs burger that is healthy for you as our government grant for stem cells created the cows. Hopefully you can seen me clearly from those new Samsung LED t.vs, they are the official t.v of Congress.

[mmarshall]

Originally Posted by Lexmex

I think people are smart enough to make their own judgments and perceptions of what is thrown at them and vote accordingly in the ballot box.

Exactly. That was the point I was trying to make......your vote comes from your mind, brain, and conscience, not from $$$$$. Of course, people often vote their pocketbooks in terms of which candidate whose policies they think will benefit them most financially, but, again, that isa personal decisiuon and is not necessarily determined by the amount of campaign $$$$$ that corporations or unions spend.

So, overall, I am convinced that the Court's ruling was correct. If companies and unions want to spend campaign $$$$$, fine (there shouldn't be limits), but that, in itself, is not going to "buy" elections....votes will determine elections.

[mmarshall]

Originally Posted by 1SICKLEX

Bottom line, money talks, bull**** runs the marathon Just a matter of time before a speech sounds like this;

Sure......Money talks, but money can only do so much. Money CANNOT force you, as an individual, to pull a certain lever or mark a certain ballot in the voting booth. That's up to you, and you alone. Billionaire Ross Perot found that out, in both 1992 and 1996, when he outspent Bush, Dole, and Clinton combined, and still lost.......twice.

[Teal Sc400]

Originally Posted by mmarshall

Sure......Money talks, but money can only do so much. Money CANNOT force you, as an individual, to pull a certain lever or mark a certain ballot in the voting booth. That's up to you, and you alone. Billionaire Ross Perot found that out, in both 1992 and 1996, when he outspent Bush, Dole, and Clinton combined, and still lost.......twice.

I agree...another perfect example, last weeks special election in Massachusetts. Democratic groups outspending GOP 2-1 and who won.

http://www.brownforussenate.com/pres...itical-machine

[Lexmex]

Originally Posted by bitkahuna

to critics of the court ruling, maybe we should also ban lawyers from supporting candidates since 80% support democrats.

So true, trial lawyers groups are now probably privately clapping at the decision as they give droves to the Democrats.

[mmarshall]

Originally Posted by bitkahuna

to critics of the court ruling, maybe we should also ban lawyers from supporting candidates since 80% support democrats.

Originally Posted by Lexmex

So true, trial lawyers groups are now probably privately clapping at the decision as they give droves to the Democrats.

But, by the some token, corporate lawyers give primarily to Republicans.

[Lexmex]

Originally Posted by mmarshall

But, by the some token, corporate lawyers give primarily to Republicans.

I guess that would be most of the other 20% of lawyers.

[4TehNguyen]

Campaign Finance - John Stossel:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QeHxSW52Hmc&feature=sub

"You cant keep money out of politics. As long as youve got $3 trillion taxed and spent by the govt, people will try to get control of that"
David Boaz - CATO Institute

[4TehNguyen]

wow now Obama has some taste, calling out the Supreme Court during his SOTU address:
http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=6148956n&tag=api

[4TehNguyen]

3 Reasons Not To Sweat The "Citizens United" SCOTUS Ruling:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rUdFaIYzNwU&feature=sub

more free speech is always a good thing.

[4TehNguyen]

Justice Clarence Thomas defends McCain Feingold decision:
http://www.breitbart.tv/audio-justic...ance-decision/

“If 10 of you got together and decided to speak, just as a group, you’d say you have First Amendment rights to speak and the First Amendment right of association. If you all then formed a partnership to speak, you’d say we still have that First Amendment right to speak and of association,"

-Justice Clarence Thomas said at Stetson University College of Law.

[WhiteTiger]

Until we realize that spending Millions upon Millions of Dollars for a job that pays a few $100K/yr and keep overlooking the integrity and compliance issues that comes with this arrangement just means that our system of politics will never change. McCain-Feingold is nary more than a joke anymore!

Reform, what reform?

Freedom of Speech is important but Not at the risk of corruption! And to think that Freedom of Speech doesn't come with any form of responsibility doesn't understand what the 1st Amendment really means!

[4TehNguyen]

So freedoms just suddenly disappear because you are now part of a group? So you believe groups of people shouldn't have individual rights like free speech as argued in this Supreme Court case? By that token you would be OK with govt being able to search and seize a corporation they want, govt eminent domaining their property, deny them due process and a trial?

this corruption and corporations are gonna take over is a giant red herring argument. Its funny how people would just throw their freedoms away to get some security.

*insert famous Ben Franklin quote here*

[4TehNguyen]

the 4 liberal Justice dissent should've been the dead giveaway at what they attempted to do - judicial activism. BTW you should've seen the govt lawyers arguments for why McCain Feingold was constitutional, they were utterly and completely laughable. Too bad the new justice Sotomayor, ruled against free speech.

Do people truly think corporations will give unlimited amounts of money? They have these things called shareholders they have to answer and be accountable to. If they give millions to some candidate you can really piss off shareholders that may not like that candidate and they will dump their shares.

NBC is a corporation, but they are guaranteed free press by 1A, but you agree with restricting their free speech? There can be no free press without free speech.

This ruling was just because it was a total and blatant violation of the 1st Amendment. Constitutional scholars saw this ruling coming years ago and it was just a matter of time that it was challenged and shot down.