What do Fayette County citizens think?

I'd be interested in your take on this reaction to the Supreme Court decision:

By any fair legal definition, the decision yesterday by The Supreme
Court 5 constitutes nothing less than an act of TREASON against the
people of the United States. Having read and analyzed the entire 183
page decision and all of its concurring and dissenting opinions
ourselves, we are fully prepared to support this accusatory
conclusion.Having so grossly abused its jurisdiction by presuming to decide a
question expressly WAIVED by the petitioner in the Court below (p
12), this rogue Supreme Court ruled for the FIRST time that NO
corporation can be constrained from unlimited influence over our
elections. And even assuming that the Court intended the decision to
only apply to American corporations, the Court expressly DECLINED (pp
46-47) to reach the question of whether foreign ownership stakes in
American corporations should likewise be given carte blanche to put
their thumbs on the scales of our democracy.Thus, until Congress FURTHER acts (and it must, though it could not
have escaped the attention of The Supreme Court 5 that the current
Republican minority has vowed to obstruct ANYTHING of consequence
that Congress might try to pass), there is now nothing to constrain
foreign nationals, even our most sworn enemies, from usurping what
even the most die hard Tea Bagger takes as an article of faith, that
the rights of citizenship of this country are ONLY for Americans.

Davids mom's blog | login to post comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Further reading
Submitted by Citizen_Steve on Mon, 01/25/2010 - 10:45pm.

Les Francis wrote a pretty good opinion piece on the decision that may help you reclaim some of your lost sleep, http://www.mercurynews.com/opinion/ci_14265584. I tend to favor full disclosure over legislated channels of donation; no matter how it is legislated, people will donate to the causes they support.

Steve

login to post comments
An old technique
Submitted by Davids mom on Tue, 01/26/2010 - 9:43am.

. . . of corporate control. BOYCOTT. Full disclosure of donations - lends some transparency.

login to post comments
Citizen_Steve
Submitted by Davids mom on Tue, 01/26/2010 - 9:23am.

This had a calming affect.

Most important, in my view the survival and success of our representative democracy was in peril long before this Supreme Court ruling. My worry is that the American electorate is woefully undereducated when it comes to politics, government, and public policy issues, whether the arguments come from the far right or the far left. Consider the fact that roughly two out of five Democrats believe that former President George W. Bush had advance knowledge of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, and almost exactly the same proportion of Republicans believe that Barack Obama was born outside the United States and is ineligible to be president.Rather than hyperventilate over the Supreme Court decision, reasonable people should get down to the hard work of educating the American public about what's real and what isn't, what's important and what isn't.It may not be glamorous, and it may not provide much fodder for TV's talking heads, but it is essential.

Thanks for the reference.

login to post comments
Thinking Fayette County citizens, DM, think before they speak.
cogitoergofay's picture
Submitted by cogitoergofay on Mon, 01/25/2010 - 9:25pm.

Thinking Fayette County citizens, David's Mom, think before they speak. Did you read the written decision? Believe in the rule of law. Perhaps you should study and think before you insult and repeat "talking points".

I disagree with a 5-4 ruling that occurred 37 years ago but I will recognize it as law. That was Roe v. Wade.

The Supreme Court ruled that a black man was not a man. A subsequent Republican President made it right; A Republican Congress (and ratifying states) made it law. Thus, Dred Scott was reversed. Plessy v. Ferguson was made right by Brown v. Board of Education.

If there is any one single person that showed the fallacy of public financing and reform in elections it is most certainly Barack Obama. He thumbed his nose at the reform.

And let's have some perspective--- in the 2008 election cycle less money was spent on the Presidential election and all races for Congress than Americans spent that year for potato chips. OK, now I sound like Bonkie.

Believe in the rule of law.


login to post comments
cogitoergofay
Submitted by Davids mom on Tue, 01/26/2010 - 9:15am.

Thanks to The Citizen for providing us with 'cite' ability. Thanks to those bloggers who realize that I didn't write what was shared, but just asked your reaction to the item that is circulating around the country. Republican/Democrat - currently does not define the American public - who are correctly questioning our lawmakers at this time.

To the other bloggers who took the time to respond...thanks for your input!

login to post comments
Loved the decision
NUK_1's picture
Submitted by NUK_1 on Mon, 01/25/2010 - 11:51am.

I hated the McCain-Feingold bill to begin with and always thought it was unconstitutional. Glad enough of the SC also agrees.


login to post comments
Much alarm about more of the status quo
The Wedge's picture
Submitted by The Wedge on Mon, 01/25/2010 - 10:18am.

How was it that some corporations had limits on their speech, such as Conagra, but other corporations had free and unfettered access to their speech, like GE/NBC? Also, what is different about the AFL/CIO with 11 million dues paying members having free access while a smaller company like Clorox having fetters placed upon its communication?

But don't worry too much, the Administration will get around it by placing limits on its corporate governance and placing financial penalties in the form of punative taxation. Have no fear, dissenting opinions from leftist ideology will continue to be attacked and squelched by fine, upstanding, left-leaning people.

And DM, I am surprised that you would use a completely sexualized term such as a "teabagger". I view it with the same derision that I have for polite society using SNAFU and FUBAR without any pause about what the term stands for.


login to post comments
And Abuse of Jurisdiction???
The Wedge's picture
Submitted by The Wedge on Mon, 01/25/2010 - 10:47am.

Most of the Federal Government is an abuse of Constitutional jurisdiction. Do you think that Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid are fully within the jurisdiction of the federal government?

And also the use of "teabagger" is a democrat displaying gay-baiting. nice effort


login to post comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.