Supreme Court Removes Limits on Corporate, Labor Donations to Campaigns

Originally posted by SyphonX
reply to post by ziggystrange

 

First of all, these lawmakers and justices are not "conservatives" they are neo-cons, wolves in sheep costumes. I though this is made abundantly clear throughout many ATS posts.

There are not many conservatives or libertarians these days, especially on ATS, that would ever support this or anything like it. So please, stop acting like anyone here is "responsible" by some grand notion that because the justices say they are conservative, that they are anything like us. It's like Glenn Beck calling himself a libertarian... No libertarian worth their salt would ever follow that.

Look,

Yes the Justices were setup to do this by Ronnie, Bush Sr, and Baby Bush.
That is exactly what I am saying. You are quick to distance, you are the second "poster" in 60 seconds to mention Beck.

Everyone here that voted these people in are partially responsible, as is everyone for letting it happen. But sometimes you have to drive home a point.

I will stop posting for now. I think, we will see.

Ziggy Strange

All 5 of the conservative judges that voted YES should lose their lifetime post as Surpreme Court Justices instantly and be held without bail for treason.

This is absolutely insane and I can't believe it happened. It is a complete nightmare. If this doesn't get reversed within the next week, every single American should march on Washington and shut this sh1t down ourselves.

Originally posted by David9176
reply to post by ziggystrange

 

Ziggy,

You need to stop lashing out everyone. i'm a conservative/libertarian...and there is no way in hell I would ever support this...I don't know how anyone could.

People don't understand what we just gave international corporations. They now have the power to EASILY corrupt/blackmail politicians. Corporations that do not care at all for the United States and it's sovereignty...let alone the middle class which has all but disappeared.

Cool it some. I know u are angry...I am as well.

Just because someone is conservative does not mean they support this.

Ya, this is in the neocon realm if you ask me, I know you David and I can atest to your
fortitude. I really hope people like you can become the mainstream of your ideology,
these judges and their opinions are treasonous and felonious at best and NOT in line with what you say consistently.

Here we all were debating the dangers of socialistisms for over a year and we get blind sided with some in your face corporofascism with the stroke of a pen.

reply to post by ChrisCrikey

Where are the other conservatives besides you expressing their outrage and targeting it appropriately?

I'll tell you where they are.

They are giddy with excitement that Democrats are going to lose big in the next elections...and this court decision pretty much seals the deal. This ends the coming "socialism" that never actually came.

Democrats are far from not being corrupt themselves....but for Republicans to support the incredible corruption that will now come...with incredible international influence...then they are being hypocritical.

I am one who will not hammer those I disagree with if I feel they are being genuine as I know they are well intentioned for the well being of our country.

Someone give me a big populist movement. I'll beg. I'll say pretty pretty please. I'll kiss and shine your shoes.

Give me a populist movement!

reply to post by ziggystrange


Oh, God!!!!!!!!! The world is coming to an end!!!!!! Bill Fox O'reilly and Olbermann of all people agree as well!

For sh@t's and giggles I turned to O'Reilly tonight to hear him bloviate about how great this ruling is and low and behold he said and I quote "you can now basically buy a president". He also said, this can't be good.

The world is truly ending now.

reply to post by Cowgirlstraitup7

The world is truly ending now.

I disagree. Perhaps now all of us on opposing sides of the political spectrum and ideologies will now realize that we must work together to defeat a common foe.

reply to post by Someone336


Only if everybody wakes up, and that is a lot to ask for. I don't see how these 5 conservative supreme court justices could totally sell us out like this. This is a complete and utter travesty. The cops in Supreme Court room should have arrested the justices as soon as the gavel sounded.

[edit on 21-1-2010 by tooo many pills]

reply to post by tooo many pills


I wanna know who has been signing their paychecks. Which Justices were they, by the way?

reply to post by Someone336


John G. Roberts (chief injustice) - Appointed by: President George W. Bush
Clarence Thomas - Appointed by: President George H. W. Bush
Anthony Kennedy - Appointed by: President Reagan
Antonin Scalia - Appointed by: President Reagan
Samuel A. Alito, Jr. - Appointed by: President George W. Bush

As for who signs their paychecks? Who has the most money? I'm willing to bet the FED did this, so we would forget about auditing them. But I am pretty mad so I am not thinking as clearly as I should.

(Current (2009) salary for the Chief Justice is $217,400 per year, while the Associate Justices each make $208,100)

[edit on 21-1-2010 by tooo many pills]

reply to post by Cowgirlstraitup7

I quote "you can now basically buy a president". He also said, this can't be good.

I am quite surprised he said this. Maybe he has a few good bones in his body afterall. Sean Hannity was praising this like it was the second coming of Jesus on his radio show. GB is SILENT as far as I know...the man who FIGHTS against corruption on likely the biggest ruling of our lifetime and he said nothing.

reply to post by tooo many pills

John G. Roberts (chief injustice) - Appointed by: President George W. Bush Clarence Thomas - Appointed by: President George H. W. Bush Anthony Kennedy - Appointed by: President Reagan Antonin Scalia - Appointed by: President Reagan Samuel A. Alito, Jr. - Appointed by: President George W. Bush

WOW

It doesn't get anymore black and white as that.

Originally posted by Cowgirlstraitup7
reply to post by ziggystrange

 

Oh, God!!!!!!!!! The world is coming to an end!!!!!! Bill Fox O'reilly and Olbermann of all people agree as well!

For sh@t's and giggles I turned to O'Reilly tonight to hear him bloviate about how great this ruling is and low and behold he said and I quote "you can now basically buy a president". He also said, this can't be good.

The world is truly ending now.

Hard to believe that's how bad it is.


SOMEONE336,

I think it's time for all of us to think about "our" future not as individuals but as Americans. Like I said this is "Check" not "mate" but it's mate in 3 and our move.

Ziggy

reply to post by David9176


Yeah it was at the end of his show and he has some blond chick on saying how this is great for free speech, and then O'Reilly said that, I was shocked. I posted a link to this ATS thread on my facebook and told all my conservative friends to kiss my butt. I am sure I am being deleted in mass right now for what I said, but who cares. This is serious!

reply to post by tooo many pills


Wow. Can't say I'm not surprised though.

John G. Roberts, Jr.

* In 2001, "Critics point[ed] to Roberts' representation of big business and his role in cases attacking the ADA, affirmative action, and labor interests as possible causes for opposition." [8] Roll Call reported, "The lobbying resume of Supreme Court nominee John Roberts is longer than it initially seemed. Even before he lobbied the Office of Management and Budget on behalf of the Cosmetic, Toiletry and Fragrance Association, Roberts worked on behalf of two clients in the peanut industry" (Tory Newmyer and Kate Ackley, "K Street Files," Roll Call, July 25, 2005).

* In 2003, Alliance for Justice said that "John Roberts’ legal career and professional writings reveal that he is out of the mainstream in his legal views in a number of areas, most prominently civil rights and the right to choose. His record as a member of the Bush and Reagan administrations reflects opposition to the rights of women and minorities, as well as a restrictive view of the proper role of federal courts in protecting the environment and the rights of criminal defendants. His comments about the Rehnquist Court reveal Roberts’ extremist ideology, a view confirmed by his membership in and connections to ultra-conservative legal groups.

"Mr. Roberts has been nominated to a federal court with tremendous influence. The Washington Times said of the nomination of Roberts (along with that of Miguel Estrada) to the D.C. Circuit that it, 'offer[s] business the best opportunity in years to free itself from government regulations ... A victory for conservatives on the appellate court could cut deeply into the aspirations of environmentalists, labor groups, and other social activists. They depend on federal regulations to carry out their advocacy efforts.'"

Sourcewatch

Clarence Thomas

Upon his graduation, many firms tried to recruit Thomas by hinting at opportunities to do pro bono work. This tactic, however, served only to offend Thomas and he turned every offer down. Thomas decided to return to Missouri to work in the office of then State Attorney General John Danforth. The job allowed him to work in the tax division and did not force his involvement in any civil rights cases. When Danforth won an election to the U.S. Senate three years later in 1977, Thomas left the attorney general's office and became a corporate lawyer in the pesticide and agriculture division of the Monsanto Company.

Since becoming a justice, Thomas has aligned closely with the far right of the Court. He votes most frequently on the same side as the conservative camp of Rehnquist and Scalia. When Thomas began his tenure on the Court, many observers perceived him as a junior version of Scalia. Since then, Thomas has emerged from Scalia's shadow offering hints at his own conservative thinking.

www.oyez.org..." target="_blank" class="postlink">Clarence Thomas

Antonin Scalia

In January 2004, Scalia spent time duck hunting with Vice President Dick Cheney at a private camp (guests of Wallace Carline, owner of Diamond Services in Amelia, St. Mary Parish,[3]) in southern Louisiana (reportedly travelling on Air Force 2[4]) just three weeks after the court agreed to take up the vice president's appeal in lawsuits over his handling of Vice President Cheney's Energy Task Force. [5],[6]

* While Scalia and Cheney are avid hunters and longtime friends, several experts in legal ethics questioned the timing of their trip and said it raised doubts about Scalia's ability to judge the case impartially.
* But Scalia rejected that concern, saying, "I do not think my impartiality could reasonably be questioned."

In April 2004, "Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia ordered U.S. Marshals to seize the tapes of reporters who recorded his speeches before two religious schools in Mississippi. Ironic in that the man who fancies himself the sole authority on the Constitution would believe that reporters should not be able to talk about what he says." [7], [8]

Sourcewatch

Samuel A. Alito, Jr.

This guy is a real interesting one:

Samuel A. Alito, Jr. was nominated October 31, 2005, by President George W. Bush to be an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. Alito would replace Associate Justice Sandra Day O'Connor who was to retire this fall. Alito's nomination came four days after White House Counsel Harriet E. Miers withdrew her nomination.

The White House has appointed Ed Gillespie, the co-chairman of Quinn Gillespie & Associates to help win Senate support for Alito's confirmation. [1]

Check out Quinn Gillespie & Associates...

Continuing on:

"It's interesting to note that when Sam became U.S. Attorney in New Jersey, and needed to appoint his First Assistant U.S. Attorney (his top deputy), he looked outside the office and brought on board a highly experienced prosecutor from the Southern District of New York by the name of Michael Chertoff. --Eric, Is That Legal?, October 31, 2005.

"Three years ago Alito drew conflict-of-interest accusations after he upheld a lower court's dismissal of a lawsuit against the Vanguard Group. Alito had hundreds of thousands of dollars invested with the mutual fund company at the time. He denied doing anything improper but recused himself from further involvement in the case." --Christopher Lee, Washington Post, October 28, 2005.

Samuel A. Alito, Jr.


[edit on 21-1-2010 by Someone336]

Originally posted by Blaine91555
I don't think some of you understand. The Supreme Court just ruled that a Corporation or a Union is equal to a citizen and has the same rights. This is dangerous in many ways. That's why both Parties are upset over this. It was perhaps the worst decision ever made by the Supreme Court. It's is giving citizenship rights to an entity that is not human or even alive.

If Walmart is a citizen and therefore can be prisoned. How big do you think the prison will be?

On a conspiratorial note it appears that Bush Jr appointee Chief Justice John Roberts wrote that this case could not be resolved on narrower grounds and therefore the need to overturn nearly a century of legal precendent! In other words this decision did not need to be made but was pushed through because he had the votes.

Why the rush?? Could it be the fear of a liberal justice appointee or maybe the NWO is moving into high gear?

The conservative majority hypocritically ignores their usual complaints about activist courts overruling precedent based on their preferences knowing this ruling will ensure a lock in the 2012 elections. Seems shortsighted to me...because that sword cuts both ways.

This is corporatocracy, corporatism, Fascism plain and simple.
Does anyone really believe that corporations are "persons' entitled to free speech?
Corporations live forever and have access to nearly unlimited funds.

The solution is simple but requires "We the people" to act.

Public funding for all elections!
Revoke corporate personhood!

reply to post by Cowgirlstraitup7


I'm a young person, maybe my opinion doesn't count but here it goes.
I read this thread, and a few other ones yesterday, one was that Ziggy guy's.

I read the guy Ziggy posts and saw some of his stuff. I thought he was off, his rocker. And some socialist.

Today, I think he had it right, I need a new cause, cause I'm not buying any more Conservative crap any more period. I believed, I went to rallies my dad is a liberal/centrist, he kept telling me this was gonna happen, I said yeah Sotomayor is gonna make sure. He told me I'll bet you my retirement it's the Conservatives.

I though he was full of it, I just apologized to him, he was crying watching the TV and told me those bastards, they just killed America.

I think we all owe Ziggy at leas a "you had it right" buddy.

You do what you want but I know when I'm wrong, and I own it.

Ziggy I'm giving you a star on every post on this thread, you were right.

I don't know the guy but I thought his posts were over the top, but today, I had to do some thinking. I only signed up yesterday but I know a lot already.

I admit I got duped. I never was agreeing with the crazy stuff but I thought the liberals were gonna do this to us. Right now the Dems look a lot better than the Reps and the other right wingers. I checked and that guy Grayson really introduced a bill like Ziggy said. That's 2 for 2.

I ain't no genius but I know that 2+2 = 4

I'm watching the Democrats now more than ever, if they do the right thing, I'll switch, If the Reps keep up saying this is a good thing for free speech, I'm never going to trust a conservative ever again. All the revolution stuff was nothing. We need to think.

Kill me if you want, but I'm not getting fooled again.

Cyberstray

This has been one of my greatest fears for American democracy.

It is a sad, sad day for America.

Well people, there is still a way out of this. We can petition our politicians for a constitutional amendment prohibiting the granting of rights to non human, or non living beings. We better do something, or we are going to lose even the pretense of our Constitution.

Originally posted by ventian
All the mouth breathers that voted for Obama to stop the way Washington does business just got their wish.

Maybe the mouth breathers should actually look at who voted how on this PoS ruling.

Although the SCOTUS in general has gotten more and more corporate friendly over the years.

www.nytimes.com...

Today, however, there are no economic populists on the court, even on the liberal wing. And ever since John Roberts was appointed chief justice in 2005, the court has seemed only more receptive to business concerns. Forty percent of the cases the court heard last term involved business interests, up from around 30 percent in recent years. While the Rehnquist Court heard less than one antitrust decision a year, on average, between 1988 and 2003, the Roberts Court has heard seven in its first two terms — and all of them were decided in favor of the corporate defendants.