In my mind I have an idealized view of the Supreme Court. I imagine learned men and women wholly focused on the law as it pertains to protecting the rights and liberties of the people of the United States. I expect any judge who is given the responsibility of the highest court of law in our land to be fair and just. I'm not saying that these justices aren't doing that, but . . . .
I have no idea how limiting campaign contributions is an infringement on free speech. You can say anything you like, but spending millions of dollars on an elected official's campaign cannot be the only way to express oneself. My opinion is that this law is unfair to all of the groups and people who do not have the money to flood our airwaves with advertisements pushing personal agendas. If we all do not have the same access to advertising then how is this speech free.
I cannot understand how the court came to this decision. Free speech is a cornerstone of the foundation of America. As we all know, that leaves us open to listening to some prime, grade A bullshit. I am going to argue now for another cornerstone of our foundation; Government for the people, by the people. How are politicians supposed to keep the people's best interests in mind when it costs so much to run a campaign and the bulk of his or her money comes from private interest groups? Will it be that only the wealthiest Americans will be able to run for office? How is this representing the American public?
I sincerely hope that some very smart lawyers are gathering together as we speak to strategize on how to re-argue this case. In my opinion, the ruling feels extremely exclusionary and down right contemptuous of the American people. How are we supposed to change government without the ability to limit the influence of private interest groups with corporate money behind them on our elected officials. Sorry, Supreme Court, but this feels like a slap in the face. Who is running this show anyway? The people or big business?
Friday, January 22, 2010
Supreme Court
Posted by S.D.S at 1:14 PM
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
I agree that this is an unfortunate decision that the Supreme Court has made. It will without a doubt change the political landscape as we know it. The effects of this decision will be felt for many years to come.
Justice Anthony M. Kennedy wrote for the majority, “If the First Amendment has any force, it prohibits Congress from fining or jailing citizens, or associations of citizens, for simply engaging in political speech.”
We cannot silence people’s freedom of speech just because we do not like what they’re saying. It is more important to uphold the ideals that this country was founded upon or to quiet treacherous opinions?
Obama called it “a major victory for big oil, Wall Street banks, health insurance companies and the other powerful interests that marshal their power every day in Washington to drown out the voices of everyday Americans.” I too am not in favor of this decision.
Perception is reality. It seems that the candidate that has more money and can saturate the market with advertising will be most likely to win. I wonder if Obama would have won if he did not have so much money during his campaign.
I’m sure that whatever the outcome is from this decision is, it won’t be good for me.
To answer your question, Big Business is running this show. And, the Supreme Court just gave them their approval.
I saw it summed up best in someone's FB comment: "Welcome to the United States of America, Inc."
I've often wondered about freedom of speech. We only have freedom of speech in certain regards. For instance, in advertising, there are no freedom of speech rights. These people are not free to say anything they want. They are held accountable to truth in advertising laws. In another instance, news outlets have to be aware of slander and libel. Yet, the Supreme Court has no issue with major corporations buying uninformed votes with lies.
Yeah, that makes sense.
I thought only individuals were supposed to enjoy the rights expressed in the Bill of Rights. I had no idea that these rights also extended to multi-billion dollar corporations who want to buy votes. IMO, freedom of political expression doesn't nearly stretch that far.
Yet the Supreme court has given corporations the green light to spend as much as they like for political advertising. Isn't political advertising still an advertisement? Why does political advertising have to be protected under freedom of speech? The whole thing is making me feel a little sick.
The worst part of this is, it only hurts Democrats for the most part. The Republicans are in the pocket of Big Business. The Democrats are not (generally speaking).
So, BB says to Sen.X (D), "Vote this way, or we run a $90M ad campaign against you this Nov." What's the Dem. to do?
On the other hand, BB says to Sen.Y (R), "Vote this way, or else..." Heck, Republican was already gonna vote that way, because he was bought and paid for the previous election.
So, we lose Dems and we gain Reps, but even worse, we all just lose... Unless we're Big Business. And, you have to be on the board...not work for one.
This is just f'n crazy...
The craziest part... There are people out there who believe the Democrats are conspiring against us! They can't even see where this leads.
Campaign reform is going in the wrong direction!
Just to make clear, both sides take special interest, corporate campaign contributions.
The thing is now corporations, special interest groups can go about it in a direct way. So I do like the transparent aspect. I read something funny today that candidates should wear the names of their "sponsors" on their suits like the NASCAR drivers do.
Hope this opens the eyes of everyone regardless of their party affiliation.
In a letter from Abraham Lincoln to (Col.) William Elkins, Nov. 21, 1864.
"I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country. As a result of the war, corporations have been enthroned and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until all wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed.
Wow, sobering.
In response to GMA...
Yes, both sides take special interest money. We're in agreement. I just wanted to point out that because the Republican agenda is clearly to allow Big Business more control over their own interests, they will be the ones more likely to benefit from this decision.
Love the idea of wearing their sponsors! Maybe instead of showing their party affiliation in parentheses after their name when they are pictured on the tube, they could list their sponsors. Of course, there'd be no room left on the screen for anything else. ;-)
Lincoln was a bright man. We need some of them in Foggy Bottom today.
Post a Comment