Congress Shall Make NO LAW....

NigelTufnel said:
Well, I'm telling you what the Supreme Court did with respect to corporate electioneering activities. It turned the clock back to prior to the reforms that passed in the wake of Watergate. Your assertion that the decision merely returns us to the state quo ante 2002 is incorrect.
Click to expand...

Well I know what the case was about, and it challenged McCain-Feingold. The effective result of the court's decision, may have overturned some previous finding, which was unconstitutional as well. The case was about Freedom of Speech, and this right has been attacked since way before 2002, so this doesn't really surprise me, if it's actually the case. But it seems, you haven't presented anything to look at, or told us specifics on what it overturned, you've just presented what you thought was a 'gotcha' on me, which is very cute, but FAILS in the arena of this debate. Sorry!
 
Fascist hr yurt, who is in love with insurance companies, is here to save free trade from the populists.

Go yurt, you tampon.
 
AssHatZombie said:
You seem to be elated that finally the world is fair since corporations can direct unlimited amounts of cash to political propaganda.

Corporations shouldn't have free speech. People should.
Click to expand...

LMAO... The title of the now historic landmark case is:

CITIZENS UNITED v. FEC

That should be obvious as to who was the Plaintiff! 'Nuff said!
 
NigelTufnel said:
Seriously? How do you substantively respond to that comment?
Click to expand...

You don't! You slink off in embarrassment because you were totally and completely PWNED! You were schooled in the arena of debate by someone who destroyed your flimsy points one by one, and left you without anything of substance to say.

Seriously, why haven't you logged off?
 
NigelTufnel said:
Seriously? How do you substantively respond to that comment?
Click to expand...
I :dunno:, AHZ found a way. Basically I wanted to point out how much your insulting skill was lacking. I'd say you needed to exercise it more but apparently, as you use it so often, exercise doesn't help.
 
AssHatZombie said:
money isn't speech.
Click to expand...
If I use my money to buy a sign, since it was "money" (and according to you therefore could never be speech) do you and the government you want so badly to control you and everybody else get to decide what I write on the sign? What if it was five of us who formed together, maybe petitioned the government and in order to get it done more efficiently we formed a non-profit corporation? If we then bought signs, since it was "money" would you then get to decide what we could write on them, whether we could gather, whether we could petition the government through speech?...

Do you get to form a brood squad and attack and destroy any corporation that you deem unworthy that doesn't say exactly what the government tells them to in their ads?
 
AssHatZombie said:
I guess judicial activism is fine with you afterall. Oh well. You're a sad fascist.
Click to expand...

When the Judiciary is actively restoring freedom of speech pursuant to the Constitution, yes... I do support an activist court!

As I pointed out, it is YOUR view which promotes unabashed fascism. Do I need to explain it to you again.... You do not live in a society where only individuals can contribute in politics. You will never live in that society in America. Given that FACT OF LIFE AND REALITY... We can NOT restrict one group from rights to free speech while giving those same rights to others! According to the Constitution, Congress shall make NO LAW... So it is very clear that we can not restrict ANY free speech from ANY group or individual! You are advocating for a system where "corporate" entities are discriminated against in the political debate, and "corporations" are merely collections of individuals... groups... just like ACORN is a group or collection of individuals. These entities all deserve a right to petition for redress of their grievances, because they are entities comprised of citizens, and Congress can't deny them that right.
 
Damocles said:
If I use my money to buy a sign, since it was "money" (and according to you therefore could never be speech) do you and the government you want so badly to control you and everybody else get to decide what I write on the sign? What if it was five of us who formed together, maybe petitioned the government and in order to get it done more efficiently we formed a non-profit corporation. If we then bought signs, since it was "money" would you then get to decide what we could write on them, whether we could gather, whether we could petition the government through speech?...
Click to expand...

Do all the signs you want litte damo boy.
 
Yurt said:
nobody said it was...nice strawman
Click to expand...

It's not really a strawman. A lot of people who support the idea of few restrictions on corporate money make exactly that argument, that money is speech. Limbaugh has actually made that argument pretty frequently.

Ultimately, that's what it comes down to, since corporations can vastly outspend average Americans, and the sheer magnitude of their financial advantage would (and already does, to a great degree) give them an inordinately large voice in our political process.

Do some googling on the prescription drug bill from a few years back (the famous midnight vote). The whole story behind that bill is pretty chilling, and a good wake-up call for anyone who thinks corporate money in politics isn't that big of a deal...
 
Damocles said:
If I use my money to buy a sign, since it was "money" (and according to you therefore could never be speech) do you and the government you want so badly to control you and everybody else get to decide what I write on the sign? What if it was five of us who formed together, maybe petitioned the government and in order to get it done more efficiently we formed a non-profit corporation? If we then bought signs, since it was "money" would you then get to decide what we could write on them, whether we could gather, whether we could petition the government through speech?...
Click to expand...

somebody needs to inform azzhattle what fascism actually means
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top