McCain-Feingold Partially Reversed

ScotusBlog ^ | 01/21/10 | Erin Miller

[Dr. North]

Does that mean that there are no longer any 30 or 60 day prohibitions on specific-issue ads that reference a particular candidate?

Can anyone quote a particular part of the new ruling which addresses that?

[Lucius Cornelius Sulla]

people like you are any better than the lefties like Gore who say the debate is over with no debate.

Most Freepers know that ls is a published professor of American history. Who are you?

[familyop]

Using billions of dollars in bribery funds to control politicians and drown the speech of their competitors in waves of propaganda through dishonest media outlets is not an activity protected by the Constitution. The left/liberal, globalist billionaires and their employees in corporate-government partnerships are those now violating the First Amendment—not pro-American statesmen like Duncan Hunter and his supporters.

[Leisler]

So we can save the BoR and Constitution by raping them?

OK...Good moral authority there. It really adds punch to your high falut’n rant against evil doers.

[Leisler]

Correct. It’s out.

[opentalk]

Rush is commenting on this. Said it is great, will help stop the FCC fairness doctrine.

[Rick_Michael]

He didn’t help the democrats as much as he helped the liberals....ie those farther to the left.

[Lucius Cornelius Sulla]

As I understand it, the only restriction left on political contributions is the nearly century old one forbidding corporations from contributing to candidates.

[familyop]

And while you're at it, see his general investment advice--same as from many others of lesser but valuable authority. Actions speak louder than words under an oligarchy/plutocracy, so actions they will receive.

Investment Outlook
Bill Gross | January 2010
Let’s Get Fisical
http://www.pimco.com/LeftNav/Featured+Market+Commentary/IO/2010/Let%E2%80%99s+Get+Fisical+January+2010.htm

"What amazes me most of all is that politicians can be bought so cheaply. Public records show that combined labor, insurance, big pharma and related corporate interests spent just under $500 million last year on healthcare lobbying (not much of which went to politicians) for what is likely to be a $50-100 billion annual return. The fact is that American citizens have never been as divorced from their representatives – and if that description fits the Democratic Congress now in control – then it applies to Republicans as well – past and present. So you watch Fox, or is it MSNBC? O’Reilly or Olbermann? It doesn’t matter. You’re just being conned into rooting for a team that basically runs the same plays called by lookalike coaches on different sidelines...When special interests, even singular citizens write a check, it represents a perversion of democracy not the exercise of the First Amendment."

[fortheDeclaration]

Too bad on the timing. The Dems and the MSM are down and out but they now have something to hang their hats on — they can now make hay of this by saying that the decision, made by repub appointments, is another gift to the rich corporations.

The timing is excellent!

Two victories for freedom in two days!

[familyop]

Ah...I left the following out, also written by Bill Gross of Pimco (Allianz) in the same article.

"There has been no change, there will be no change, until we the American people decide to publicly finance all national and local elections and ban the writing of even a $1 check for our favorite candidates."

When he speaks, investors listen. And as I pointed out, other investment advisors are directing very large numbers of paying clients to go around the middle men until then.

[tx_eggman]

makes you wonder if people like you are any better than the lefties like Gore who say the debate is over with no debate.

three, I'm gonna go with LS on this one. Your read of the decision was lame.

Let's see .. the conservative majority of the Supreme Court strikes down a law that curtails free speech and somehow it's a conspiracy to give the Obama administration more power.

Really poor analysis.

[Leisler]

"What amazes me most of all is that politicians can be bought so cheaply.."

First you said, like McCain and socialist Feingold, it was big money. Now you qoute 'cheeply'. So, what is it? Scott Brown, for next to nothing( no money ) asked for $500,000. I saw it on Instapundit. I Visa'd a hundred. by the end of the day, he got 1.3 million. So, he needs big money, eh? He got, from the internet a million a day for five days. Cost to him? Under 25k. How about it isn't money, it's us, voting and giving. Not some lobbyst with a few ten grand checks in a wine bar in DC, like Choakley did. Get real. We, all of us, spend more on lawn care in America than elections. Elections are CHEAP. I suspect there are 30 million hard core conservatives. If we each kick in a 100 dollars, that's 3 billion dollars. That is more than all elections combined. So, it isn't the money. You, McCain, et. al., need to get with the facts. The money spent is peanuts, and it isn't the money's fault.

[Soul Seeker]

1) SOROS was never constrained form interference in our elections. The people who were constrained were those who live by law.

2) This is happening now because a few years ago O’Connor retired. We fought Bush and Republicans and Alito was nominated and then eventually confirmed. Since his confirmation every time an issue specific to Campaign finance came before the court free speech has generally won. Had the configuration of the court been what it is now, the entire law would never have passed. It reallyis that simple and indicative of the poer one Justice can hold on the court.

[Leisler]

I will say, and spend as I please. And if needed will kill and shoot to say what I want, when I want, to whom I want, and I will defend all others that choose like wise.( 100 millions souls, +/-)

Lets seem government bond trader, with one vote, whom is going to bribe his favored law to prevent bribing into existence, do as he pleases.

It’s been a while since we cleaned up a good percentage of king worshiping, knee bending, boot licking serfs and their favored lords and masters.

Sorry, not for me.

[mojitojoe]

Stevens, Ginsburg, Sotomayor, and Breyer dissent.

Thanks. I don’t have to read any further to figure out if I like the ruling. If these four putzheads are against it, I’m all for it.
________________
I agree.

[gleeaikin]

In NJ, unions cannot use dues for political purposes. Does this mean that corporations cannot use income for political purposes? Oh, I thought the SC just ruled on that.

[Dr. North]

AWESOME.

[familyop]

"First you said, like McCain and socialist Feingold, it was big money...You, McCain, et. al., need to get with the facts."

No. You saw the quoted words of Bill Gross and regurgitated them out of context. Other highly trusted investment advisors are advocating the same actions as he. And I won't be forced to buy unnecessary things to give further revenues to various levels of fat, wasteful government and its uncompetitive parasites.

[WOBBLY BOB]

Most large corporations are buying either protection or favors—most are quite happy with this growing fascism as long as they get some free taxpayer-funded cheese or can have gubermint rules punish their competition.

While I agree with the SCOTUS decision on finance laws, I also don’t see large corporations as some monolithic, conservative voting bloc.Same goes for “non-profits”.