(linkable article I authored on Fascist Soup
I see a lot of people commenting on the fact that the Supreme Court has ruled in favor of removing all restrictions on corporate political advertising
and equating this to giving corporations the same rights as people.
If you take a moment to step back, you'll realize that you're only angry at this decision because subconsciously you understand that corporations
will work to install politicians who give them favors and kickbacks.
People, wake up.
The solution is not to restrict the speech of corporations, union, individuals, or renegade film makers.
The solution is to reduce the power of government.
If politicians were restricted to performing their constitutional roles and only allowed to legislate on those specific areas granted to them in the
constitution, it wouldn't matter one way or the other what corporate ads were being run.
Ask yourself this question: If politicians were restricted to the constitution, would corporations even bother to send lobbyists to Washington or
sponsor political campaigns?
THEY WOULD NOT!!!
Corporations only sponsor politicians because they know a small investment of a few million in campaign contributions can result in billions from
government contracts, bailouts, kickbacks, subsidies, tax breaks, and favorable regulations.
DO NOT BE MAD AT FREE SPEECH! Be mad at the system behind your anger.
John Lott explains why the ruling upheld the
rights of citizens
Do you want government regulating what movies can be shown to the public? Do you want the government determining what movies can be advertised? Or
what books can be sold? Well, the Obama administration actually argued for these regulations before the Supreme Court in defending campaign finance
regulations. Actually, they went even further and said that such regulations were essential to limiting how much money is spent on political
Fortunately, the Supreme Court disagreed. On Thursday, in the case Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, the Supreme Court struck down a law
that had been used to stop the advertising or showing of "Hillary: The Movie" during the 2008 presidential campaign. No one doubts that the movie
was critical of Hillary Clinton and that its release was timed precisely to hurt her presidential campaign. What the court couldn't abide was letting
the government decide when a movie crossed the line and became too political. The ruling eliminates bans that corporations and unions have faced in
trying to influence elections 30 days before a primary election or nominating convention, or within 60 days before a general election.
[edit on 22-1-2010 by mnemeth1]