Supreme Court Makes Decision on Free Speech Issue. Why are Liberals so Upset?

[Edie Lindsey]

In a 5-4 vote, mainly down ideological lines, the Supreme Court changed McCain-Feingold campaign finance 'reform' on grounds that it violates free speech rights of corporations. 

 

Judge Kennedy, writing for the majority said, "When Government seeks to use its full power, including criminal law,to command where a person may get his or her information or what distrusted source he or she may not hear, it uses censorship to control thought.  This is unlawful.  The First Amendment confirms the freedom to think for ourselves."

 

Prez Obama commented that it was "a major victory for big oil, Wall Street Banks, Health Insurance Co. and other powerful interests that marshall their power every day in Washington to drown out the voices of Americans." 

 

Here's an article about this topic-- what do Torchbearers think?

[XLFD]

I have to go with the majority, Edie. This may at first seem to let corporations exercise more power over political campaigns, but the limits imposed by McCain Feingold over-reached. A legal 'person' is usually equal to a 'corporation', et. al., and so the reform restricted that person's rights. Take heart, liberal folks, many corporations are on your side along with the powerful labor unions-- your message will go through, too.

[Mary A.]

Edie, I am very concerned about this issue, and I agree with President Obama. I already signed a petition expressing my concern. My family is still recovering from the near crash of the economy as are probably the majority of Americans. I don't see any good coming from this for the middle class. I believe it will make our congressional leaders even more beholden to big corporations. Bottom line is, I can't see how this is going to be good for me and my family.

[XLFD]

I totally agree with your last three sentences, Mary. Yet, I think it was a correct decision by the court. The legislature can now create some law(s) that does not violate free speech rights, as outlined in this decision, and helps the common folk too. Will that happen? Probably not.

[Guidothesemipsuedocaptitalistpig]

Mary.. the part no one is getting here, is The big banks private type banks didn't do anything to make the markets crash. It was the directive of freddy mac and fanny mae A government entity who buys those mortgages who forces banks to make bad loans.. So it is real hypocritical for the same government to now try to demonize and try to give the sole appearance that big money backs were solely responsible. Who directed those agencies to tell the banks to loosen credit standards and allow no documentation loans??? Our buddy Barney Frank. I am not saying there wasn't a degree of greed on the part of some in the housing industry. I am saying, it was more from mortgage brokers and such who get paid by the closing of a loan whether it is worthy or not, More than the individual banks. Thanks for your time.

[Mary A.]

Guido, I often let emotions dictate how I feel about something. I know that's not necessarily a good thing. You make sense, of course.

Am I selfish to state that I care about me and my family first and let the rest of America figure it out for themselves? Because right now, I feel that "little old me" is nothing but a blip on the radar screen to Congress and the Supreme Court. My government does not care about me because I am a person, not a corporation. It's downright depressing.

[Guidothesemipsuedocaptitalistpig]

I understand this feeling of your Mary I really do. And I do believe that sometimes corperations do bad things not in the common mans better interests. I guess i just don't believe the U.S. government has a better track record maybe? I'll post more latter but no Mary I really am not a pit bull about issues as much as some on the left think. Actually I might be closer to someone like max? maybe?? I believe The government needs to follow the constitution or it becomes worse than the evil companies it chooses to demonize here. but even though our views are different in bia to say companies I think we both see the government is the largest corporation which also only serves its self at this point in history.

[Mary A.]

Yes. I've become quite disenfranchised with both parties. I did have hope, though, that President Obama could effect positive change for the middle class. BTW, isn't his expertise in constitutional law?

[XLFD]

Two of the major reasons the Tea Party Movements originated were because people saw the government becoming more powerful, and gaining control over corporations they had no right to (auto companies, financial institutions, etc.). When the government begins making laws (like McCain-Feingold), that violate the constitutional rights of corporations, they can then extend that precedent into violating the rights of individuals.

Either that, or unequally enforce such laws so that corporations out of favor with the incumbent administration (donkey or elephant) are targeted. My opinion is that if even one person's or corporation's rights are diminished, the government's power grows-- and they are already too powerful; more so than our nation's founders would be happy with.

[Guidothesemipsuedocaptitalistpig]

Are not the business and people who create jobs also citizens? I feel it is more for the people we elect to be looking out for the balance of constituents, than for the government as an entity saying who can and can not spend how much to have their voice heard. It should have become obvious to a lot of people this summer in serious matters the individual little guys (tea parties) can and will be able to out shout special interests.

[Mary A.]

They may attract the media, but I don't see that they will really have much influence. Time will tell. They don't always represent me, anyway. I have somewhat convoluted political preferences.

BTW, I love Ludington Torch. I don't have to feel I'm going to be attacked personally for expressing my beliefs like on LT.

[Guidothesemipsuedocaptitalistpig]

The main stream media attempted to ignore the tea baggers calling them names and trying to tie them to big money which wasn't there. Fox was really the only media outlet who saw them as more grass roots but look how a seat held by a democrat for over 4 decades fell to pressure from tea baggers?

[AQUAMAN]

Grass roots is the answer, for sure! Thanks Guido! Yu tu Mary Lu A.!