January 22, 2010

Lawmakers Race to Limit Corporate Spending on Elections After Court Ruling

talk to the hand For those who have not kept up with this case, the Supreme Court ruled recently that portions of the McCain-Feingold (yes, that McCain) Act regulating when and how much money businesses can spend to buy ads or other campaign materials is UNCONSTITUTIONAL under the 1st Amendment.  Bravo.  But congress critters are not deterred.  All the talk about “special interest this” and “special interest that” means nothing.  What these weasels are actually saying is “the special interests that are not in favor of me.” Unions were not regulated under the law because they are “not for profit” or “non-profit” entities.  The results of this are the staggeringly powerful ACORN’s and SEIU’s in our current predicament.  It was open season for them, no season for private sector businesses.  It is ludicrous. 
So now I guess is a good time to get into a discussion about the Spirit of the Law vs. the Letter of the Law. 
“They [crooked congress critters] said they were still exploring their options. But with the Supreme Court ruling that there is "no basis for allowing the government to limit corporate independent expenditures," they will have to proceed cautiously to ensure subsequent legislation is not challenged and struck down again. “
A prime example of the fact that the Grade “A” Assholes in Washington do not get it, or do not care.  Probably both.  Instead of hearing the message that this is not a constitutional pursuit, they are now dedicated to working around the ruling.  We will never get anywhere until we have a total culture change in DC, because these people do not know how to take “NO” for an answer.  NO means NO. 
Another thing, while I am ranting a little.  You can call it a “fee” if you wish, but I know what it is, and so do you, it is a “TAX”.  I am so sick of all the euphemisms.
Read the whole sickening mess here:
FOXNews.com - Lawmakers Race to Limit Corporate Spending on Elections After Court Ruling
-KOOK

Comments (5)

Loading... Logging you in...
  • Logged in as
It's such the double standard. They are whining about the money in politics after Obama spends over $600 million to purchase the presidency. The job pays .0006% per year of what Obama spent to get the job. Obama couldn't have done it without special interest, which is no different than corporations if you want my opinion.
This is a great post, my friend. I say this because my boss at work and I were talking about this very thing this morning! We were wondering how long it'd be before the knee-jerkers in congress (lower-case intended) would take before they try to water down the Supreme Court decision. My original take was that they couldn't ... I know I'm wrong, but it empowers me to see that many of us are thinking ahead like this.

Thanks again for a great post!
1 reply · active 792 weeks ago
Thanks for a great comment. Any Supreme Court decision that is an attack on the liberal agenda which this is, doubtless going to be be picked apart for ways to go around, over, under, or even through. If we are not planning such as you are for the eventuality that this decision gets bypassed on some technicality then they win, However if we are prepared for that day then we can have a metaphorical brick wall in front of them at every turn, so we win.
RightWingLibertarian's avatar

RightWingLibertarian · 792 weeks ago

This is a great post, my friend. I say this because my boss at work and I were talking about this very thing this morning! We were wondering how long it'd be before the knee-jerkers in congress (lower-case intended) would take before they try to water down the Supreme Court decision. My original take was that they couldn't ... I know I'm wrong, but it empowers me to see that many of us are thinking ahead like this.

Thanks again for a great post!
It simply floors me when politicians use the term 'special interests.' They want to create a bogeyman, and this will usually do it these days, call it a special interest. The term in reality means nothing, absolutely nothing as you astutely point out. But most liberal politicians do not know the meaning of the word 'no,' either. It just means to them more work to find a way to do an end around that 'no' business.

Post a new comment

Comments by

Blog Widget by LinkWithin