On Jan 22, 1:02*am, Stevie Nichts wrote:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100121/...upreme_court_c...

The Supreme Court has ruled that corporations may spend freely
to support or oppose candidates for president and Congress,
easing decades-old limits on their participation in federal
campaigns.

By a 5-4 vote, the court on Thursday overturned a 20-year-old
ruling that said corporations can be prohibited from using money
from their general treasuries to pay for campaign ads. The
decision, which almost certainly will also allow labor unions to
participate more freely in campaigns, threatens similar limits
imposed by 24 states.

The justices also struck down part of the landmark McCain-
Feingold campaign finance bill that barred union- and corporate-
paid issue ads in the closing days of election campaigns.
----
Here's a suggestion for Congress: instead of unconstitutional
restrictions on free speech, how about legislating 100%
transparency for all campaign contributions?

Well, it is about time, a big thumbs up to the Supreme Court, THANK
YOU!

If Congress were doing their job regulating commerce and currency
issues, we would not need unions? All this money spent on science,
and they can't advise business, but somehow they can mandate things?
Unions are the birth place of political corruption, the embryonic
chamber of destruction when left to their own devices?

Competition solves problems, and now we have choice too? No more
unions getting a monopoly (even though it with campaign funds, never
really occured to me, Rush has said it before, but the way he
explained it today, it just sunk in there?) Nice job today Rush, I
think Rush is getting better! Genius improving Genius? INCREDIBLE!
Thank you GOD!

Thank YOU mmmmmm mmm mmmmm Rush Hudson Limbaugh mmmm mmmm mmmmmmm

On Jan 21, 5:10*pm, Editor RadioTalkingPoints
wrote:
On Jan 22, 1:02*am, Stevie Nichts wrote:





http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100121/...upreme_court_c...

The Supreme Court has ruled that corporations may spend freely
to support or oppose candidates for president and Congress,
easing decades-old limits on their participation in federal
campaigns.

By a 5-4 vote, the court on Thursday overturned a 20-year-old
ruling that said corporations can be prohibited from using money
from their general treasuries to pay for campaign ads. The
decision, which almost certainly will also allow labor unions to
participate more freely in campaigns, threatens similar limits
imposed by 24 states.

The justices also struck down part of the landmark McCain-
Feingold campaign finance bill that barred union- and corporate-
paid issue ads in the closing days of election campaigns.
----
Here's a suggestion for Congress: instead of unconstitutional
restrictions on free speech, how about legislating 100%
transparency for all campaign contributions?

Well, it is about time, a big thumbs up to the Supreme Court, THANK
YOU!

If Congress were doing their job regulating commerce and currency
issues, we would not need unions? *All this money spent on science,
and they can't advise business, but somehow they can mandate things?
Unions are the birth place of political corruption, the embryonic
chamber of destruction when left to their own devices?

Competition solves problems, and now we have choice too? *No more
unions getting a monopoly (even though it with campaign funds, never
really occured to me, Rush has said it before, but the way he
explained it today, it just sunk in there?) *Nice job today Rush, I
think Rush is getting better! *Genius improving Genius? *INCREDIBLE!
Thank you GOD!

Thank YOU * mmmmmm mmm mmmmm * Rush Hudson Limbaugh *mmmm mmmm mmmmmmm

Well, whatever else they've done - they have handed the elections and
thus, the lawmaking machinery, to the wealthiest corporations in
America. Extrapolate from that what you will.

Bruce Jensen

On Jan 21, 11:57*pm, bpnjensen wrote:


Well, whatever else they've done - they have handed the elections and
thus, the lawmaking machinery, to the wealthiest corporations in
America. *Extrapolate from that what you will.

Well sure.

But given the intelligence level of your average ditto-head it's
likely to be quite some time before they figure that out, and when
they finally do it's going to come as quite a shock.

Average Ditto-head: "HEY! I'm getting screwed!!

How did that happen and why isn't Washington *doing* something about
it?"

Heh.

On Jan 21, 8:10*pm, Editor RadioTalkingPoints
wrote:
On Jan 22, 1:02*am, Stevie Nichts wrote:





http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100121/...upreme_court_c...

The Supreme Court has ruled that corporations may spend freely
to support or oppose candidates for president and Congress,
easing decades-old limits on their participation in federal
campaigns.

By a 5-4 vote, the court on Thursday overturned a 20-year-old
ruling that said corporations can be prohibited from using money
from their general treasuries to pay for campaign ads. The
decision, which almost certainly will also allow labor unions to
participate more freely in campaigns, threatens similar limits
imposed by 24 states.

The justices also struck down part of the landmark McCain-
Feingold campaign finance bill that barred union- and corporate-
paid issue ads in the closing days of election campaigns.
----
Here's a suggestion for Congress: instead of unconstitutional
restrictions on free speech, how about legislating 100%
transparency for all campaign contributions?

Well, it is about time, a big thumbs up to the Supreme Court, THANK
YOU!

If Congress were doing their job regulating commerce and currency
issues, we would not need unions? *All this money spent on science,
and they can't advise business, but somehow they can mandate things?
Unions are the birth place of political corruption, the embryonic
chamber of destruction when left to their own devices?

Competition solves problems, and now we have choice too? *No more
unions getting a monopoly (even though it with campaign funds, never
really occured to me, Rush has said it before, but the way he
explained it today, it just sunk in there?) *Nice job today Rush, I
think Rush is getting better! *Genius improving Genius? *INCREDIBLE!
Thank you GOD!

You imbecilic moron, why don't you read up on some good old-fashioned
American history and learn why the restrictions were put there in the
first place. In fact, the justices could brush up on history as
well. Seems like people were smarter back in 1907 when they realized
how big business was interfering with the common man than they are now
in 2010. This is going to lead to political shambles, just like
repealing the Glass Steagall Act a decade ago allowed Wall St. to run
amock and get the country in the mess it's in today.

It was never in the contemplation of the Founding Fathers or the
drafters of the post-bellum amendments to endow corporations with the
personalities of human beings.

The foolish five in Scotus just legislated from the bench.

On Jan 22, 2:57*am, bpnjensen wrote:

Well, whatever else they've done - they have handed the elections and
thus, the lawmaking machinery, to the wealthiest corporations in
America. *

First, "the wealthiest corporations" include unions,
environmentalists,
and other left-wing special interests, and there's no point in
pretending otherwise.

Second, money never left politics -- McCain-Feingold spawned
any number of workarounds, and special interests continued to
spend their money to campaign for, or against, their candidates.
Why do you think so many 501 and 527 groups sprang up in
its wake?

On Jan 22, 3:40*am, wy wrote:

You imbecilic moron,

Yeah, because kindergarten insults do so much
to persuade others to your point of view, right?

why don't you read up on some good old-fashioned
American history and learn why the restrictions were put there in the
first place. *In fact, the justices could brush up on history as
well. *

They did: "Congress shall make no law...abridging the
freedom of speech, ..."

Free political speech is not free if the government can
dictate when and where you exercise it.

in 2010. *This is going to lead to political shambles, just like
repealing the Glass Steagall Act a decade ago allowed Wall St. to run
amock and get the country in the mess it's in today.

So you blame Bill Clinton for the mess the country is in today?
Go on, do go on.

bpnjensen wrote:

Well, whatever else they've [the Supreme Court] done - they have handed the elections and
thus, the lawmaking machinery, to the wealthiest corporations in
America. Extrapolate from that what you will.

Extrapolate what I will?

OK, the end of America as we know it. A BIG win for the Corporatocracy.

Want to know why you should worry about the Corporatocracy? Read
"Hoodwinked" by John Perkins, also the author of "Confessions of an
Economic Hit Man".

jls wrote:
It was never in the contemplation of the Founding Fathers or the
drafters of the post-bellum amendments to endow corporations with the
personalities of human beings.

The foolish five in Scotus just legislated from the bench.

"Foolish"? Nah, they knew EXACTLY what they were doing. I'd more go with
"sinister" or "corrupt".

On Jan 22, 2:57 am, bpnjensen wrote:

Well, whatever else they've done - they have handed the elections and
thus, the lawmaking machinery, to the wealthiest corporations in
America.

Stevie Nichts wrote:

First, "the wealthiest corporations" include unions,
environmentalists,
and other left-wing special interests, and there's no point in
pretending otherwise.

Well, yeah, you're right -- kinda, sorta.

What you overlook is the simple fact that the Big Corporations have TONS
and TONS of money, waaay more than any union or "other left-wing special
interests" could ever hope to scrape up.

And if you see no problem with letting large corporations have all that
power, IMHO you are dumber than you look.