Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Supreme Court Reverses Limits on Campaign Spending (cripples McCain-Feingold-Thompson)
WSJ ^ | 1/21/10 | staff

Posted on 01/21/2010 11:57:23 AM PST by pissant

WASHINGTON—A divided Supreme Court struck down limits on corporate political spending, overturning two precedents in a ruling likely to affect campaigning in the 2010 elections.

President Barack Obama called the decision a victory for big oil, Wall street and other interests, and said he would work with lawmakers to craft a "forceful response."

The ruling underscored the impact of former President George W. Bush's two appointments to the court. Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito joined the five-justice majority in ruling that a central provision of the 2002 McCain-Feingold campaign-finance act violated the First Amendment by restricting corporations from funding political messages in the run-up to elections.

(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption
KEYWORDS: cfr; fredthompson; mccainfeingold; ruling; scotus
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-58 next last
To: Emile
Still doesn't excuse the fact that GWB violated his oath to uphold the constitution by signing this POS into law.

You do realize that there were enough votes in Congress to overturn his veto on this legislation?

21 posted on 01/21/2010 12:15:38 PM PST by LdSentinal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: pissant

“Mr. Obama, in a statement Thursday, said: “The Supreme Court has given a green light to a new stampede of special interest money in our politics. This ruling gives the special interests and their lobbyists even more power in Washington, while undermining the influence of average Americans who make small contributions to support their preferred candidates.”

Of course more GOVERNMENT POWER is good!


22 posted on 01/21/2010 12:16:30 PM PST by sickoflibs ( "It's not the taxes, the redistribution is spending you demand stupid")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pissant

We of the NRA thank you!


23 posted on 01/21/2010 12:16:44 PM PST by Taxbilly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pissant
President Barack Obama called the decision a victory for big oil, Wall street and other interests, and said he would work with lawmakers to craft a "forceful response."

Good. Big Oil put me through college. Wall Street has helped me during my unemployment time with my investments. Let Stuttering Barry the Mulatto Queen go off on business.

The ruling underscored the impact of former President George W. Bush's two appointments to the court. Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito joined the five-justice majority in ruling that a central provision of the 2002 McCain-Feingold campaign-finance act violated the First Amendment by restricting corporations from funding political messages in the run-up to elections.

For all the things G.H.W. Bush and Dubya did wrong during their tenures, these may be the the second best acts these guys did (after watching over the liberation of Eastern Europe without a huge bloodbath, and the liberation of Iraq and AFghanistan and the routing of al-Queda).

24 posted on 01/21/2010 12:19:45 PM PST by MuttTheHoople (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/9c/TeddyVWad.jpg)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pissant; Admin Moderator
The correct title for this article is Supreme Court Reverses Limits on Campaign Spending.

FR protocol requires using the correct title to avoid duplication.

25 posted on 01/21/2010 12:20:55 PM PST by jellybean ( Bookmark http://altfreerepublic.freeforums.org/index.php for when FR is down)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Emile
Your two statements contradict one another. If this one had gone to the liberals, we'd be stuck with it for all time, but since it went to the conservatives it can be reversed at any time.

Nevertheless I agree with your basic point, that Bush had no excuse signing something he admitted was unconstitutional. Hell, he had no business signing half the stuff he did. And this one, despite the fact that wonder of wonders, SCOTUS did the right thing for once, still did a lot of damage while it was in force.

Oh, and I publicly and freely admit I was wrong: The Supreme Court CAN find their ass with both hands and a flashlight.

26 posted on 01/21/2010 12:21:09 PM PST by Still Thinking (Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: pissant

It’s about time.


27 posted on 01/21/2010 12:21:20 PM PST by freekitty (Give me back my conservative vote; then find me a real conservative to vote for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jellybean

Do you know if your guy Fred was called upon to argue in favor of it again?


28 posted on 01/21/2010 12:22:50 PM PST by pissant (THE Conservative party: www.falconparty.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: pissant

Exactly what will the ProgRats in congress propose that won’t be equally restrictive of 1st Amendment rights?

Chuckie Schumer is a commie, so we know where he stands.


29 posted on 01/21/2010 12:23:33 PM PST by o_zarkman44 (Obama is the ultimate LIE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pissant

Yep, one failed, unconstitutional law deserves another, I guess.


30 posted on 01/21/2010 12:25:14 PM PST by Manly Warrior (US ARMY (Ret) "No Free Lunches for the Dogs of War" (my spelling is generally korrect!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs
This ruling gives the special interests and their lobbyists even more power in Washington, while undermining the influence of average Americans who make small contributions to support their preferred candidates.

Big lobbyists should have power only when they are leftists pushing "good" policies like Cap and Trade. The first amendment be damned.

31 posted on 01/21/2010 12:25:32 PM PST by ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas (Pat Caddell: Democrats are drinking kool-aid in a political Jonestown)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: pissant

Last time I checked Fred wasn’t in the Senate nor is he practicing law. He’s doing his talk show.

Perhaps you could let go of you Fred hate for a few minutes and just celebrate that the Supreme Court made the right decision this time.


32 posted on 01/21/2010 12:26:32 PM PST by jellybean ( Bookmark http://altfreerepublic.freeforums.org/index.php for when FR is down)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs

I’m sure Obama wouldn’t want his Soros backed front groups and unions to lose their advantage with their soft money, by allowing the business minds of America equal voices in matters that affect their business.


33 posted on 01/21/2010 12:27:43 PM PST by o_zarkman44 (Obama is the ultimate LIE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: jellybean

I don’t hate Fred. Never have. I just hate McCain-Feingold-Thompson. And yes, I’m celebrating tonight with a frosty pint (or three) of IPA.


34 posted on 01/21/2010 12:30:44 PM PST by pissant (THE Conservative party: www.falconparty.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: JoSixChip
How did the worlds smartest Latino woman vote?

That is okay to violate the free speak rights of "Certain" people (read = especially if they don't agree with her).

35 posted on 01/21/2010 12:40:00 PM PST by thingumbob (Get to work and lets clean up this mess! and (Remember, dead terrorists don't make more terrorists!))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: pissant

Leveling the playing field against Big Union.


36 posted on 01/21/2010 12:40:32 PM PST by Redleg Duke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pissant

I’ve been waiting for this day ever since this McCain-Feingold abomination became law.

Hallay-effing-lu-ya!!!

(This has been a great week).


37 posted on 01/21/2010 12:40:36 PM PST by spinestein (The answer is 42.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jellybean; pissant

“Perhaps you could let go of you Fred hate for a few minutes and just celebrate that the Supreme Court made the right decision this time.”

You’re kidding right? Pissant HATES everybody whose name isn’t hunter. He’s just getting warmed up on Palin. Pissant’s goal in life is to insure that either his ticket wins or the dems win... Fred would have been a great president and we wouldn’t be in the sorry state we are now if he was the president. Scary part is, Hunter isn’t even going to run this time and Pissant is STILL attacking everybody else.


38 posted on 01/21/2010 12:41:55 PM PST by Robbin (If Sarah isn’t welcome, I’m not welcome, it’s just that simple…)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: colorado tanker

Good luck getting that through the Senate without a filabuster!!!!!!!


39 posted on 01/21/2010 12:42:31 PM PST by thingumbob (Get to work and lets clean up this mess! and (Remember, dead terrorists don't make more terrorists!))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs

Signing the McCain-Finegold travesty in the FIRST place was yet another proof of Bushs’ stupidity. His father puts Souter on the friggin’ court and Bush extols the virtues of unconstitutional legislation. Shrewd family, that.


40 posted on 01/21/2010 12:43:18 PM PST by Oldpuppymax (AGENDA OF THE LEFT EXPOSED)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-58 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson