HomeFairfax General ForumArrest/Ticket SearchWiki newPictures/VideosChatArticlesLinksAbout
Off-Topic :  Fairfax Underground fairfax underground logo
Welcome to Fairfax Underground, a project site designed to improve communication among residents of Fairfax County, VA. Feel free to post anything Northern Virginia residents would find interesting.
This election brought to you in part by your friendly monopolies.
Posted by: Gravis ()
Date: January 21, 2010 09:12PM

Quote
US Supreme Court overturns campaign spending limit

The US Supreme Court has rejected long-standing limits on how much companies can spend on political campaigns.

The ruling is likely to change the way presidential and congressional campaigns are funded, including this year's crucial mid-term elections.

The court's 5-4 vote ends a 20-year ban on businesses using money from their own funds to pay for campaign ads.

But US President Barack Obama condemned the decision, pledging to work with Congress for a "forceful response".

He said the court had "given a green light to a new stampede of special interest money in our politics".

"It s a major victory for big oil, Wall Street banks, health insurance companies and the other powerful interests that marshal their power every day in Washington to drown out the voices of everyday Americans," he said in a statement.

Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy said the prohibition of direct contributions from companies and unions to political candidates was a form of censorship.

...MORE...


"the wisdom of the wise will perish, the intelligence of the intelligent will vanish."095042938540

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: This election brought to you in part by your friendly monopolies.
Posted by: fraenk ()
Date: January 21, 2010 09:43PM

I hate how alll the big businesses can TV advertise the shit outa, well, ignorant folk.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: This election brought to you in part by your friendly monopolies.
Posted by: Makeshift ()
Date: January 21, 2010 10:03PM

fraenk Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I hate how alll the big businesses can TV
> advertise the shit outa, well, ignorant folk.
> the First Amendment and all that freedom
> of speech bullshit, man.

Edited for accuracy.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: This election brought to you in part by your friendly monopolies.
Posted by: Vince(1) ()
Date: January 21, 2010 11:03PM

Great. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I do NOT agree with Obama's statement. The only
> drawback I see is that come election time there is
> gonna be wall to wall political add carpeting
> during commercial breaks. I agree with the
> descision because it allows the Corporations to
> play a check and balance to what the Unions have
> been doing by collecting union dues from Libs and
> Republicans alike and misappropriating the
> collected money on political sponsorship and TV
> advertisin


More republikan mis-information. Unions and corporations have had pretty much the smae restrictions placed on them. Unions have had no advantage in the case of political sponsorships. This decision will ensure that your vote will mean nothing...corporations will buy up time and brainwash you idiots.

Registered Voter...a Big talking coward..big man on FFXU...little man in life.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: This election brought to you in part by your friendly monopolies.
Posted by: Rufus T. FIrefly ()
Date: January 21, 2010 11:11PM

Congress shall make no law... abridging the freedom of speech, or of the presscolor>


Government can't squelch free speech
by Matt Welch
CNN, January 21, 2010

Free speech really does mean free speech, and the laws that Thursday's landmark 5-4 Supreme Court decision Citizens United v. the Federal Election Commission overturned directly and heinously restricted the stuff.

Forget for the moment the broad characterization of the ruling -- such as The New York Times claim that it "sweeps aside a century-old understanding" -- and drill down to the individual case in question.

Citizens United, a conservative 501(c)(4) nonprofit that has funded a dozen political documentaries over the years, produced a critical documentary about Hillary Clinton in 2008 entitled "Hillary: The Movie."

By a decision of the federal government, which was enforcing the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (known more broadly as McCain-Feingold), this piece of political speech was banned from television.

Let's boil it down to the essential words: Political documentary, banned, government.

You don't have to be a First Amendment purist to intuit that political speech was, if anything, the most urgent subcategory covered by the First Amendment's "Congress shall pass no law" restrictions.

And you don't have to be a Hillary-hater to imagine the shoe on the other foot.

What if MoveOn.org's 501(c)(4), Campaign to Defend America, had been blocked by George W. Bush's Federal Elections Commission from broadcasting "McCain: The Movie"? Wouldn't that stink, too?

As Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote in his majority opinion, "The law before us is an outright ban, backed by criminal sanctions. Section 441b makes it a felony for all corporations -- including nonprofit advocacy corporations -- either to expressly advocate the election or defeat of candidates or to broadcast electioneering communications within 30 days of a primary election and 60 days of a general election. ... If the First Amendment has any force, it prohibits Congress from fining or jailing citizens, or associations of citizens, for simply engaging in political speech."...

The American people are not sheep, eager to be led by the highest bidder.

As the Supreme Court rightly noted today:

"The First Amendment confirms the freedom to think for ourselves."

http://www.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/01/21/welch.free.expression.campaign/index.html

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: This election brought to you in part by your friendly monopolies.
Posted by: Vince(1) ()
Date: January 22, 2010 04:49PM

You all fucking idiots...you sit on here complining about foreigners taking jobs you all dont even want any more....these people have no money...hardly any influenece. Yet...you rejoice over the power corpoarations now have...as if there is such a thing as an "American" corporation...they are all international..with no loyalties to anything but their corporate bottom line.

OK...Geez...now go fuck yourself you idiot. How about you count how many times you are butt fucked?

Registered Voter...a Big talking coward..big man on FFXU...little man in life.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: This election brought to you in part by your friendly monopolies.
Posted by: Kenny_Powers ()
Date: January 22, 2010 11:11PM

this is great news guys, its only a matter of time now until our country is called United States of Coca-Cola. Companies will own us soon.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: This election brought to you in part by your friendly monopolies.
Posted by: Vince(1) ()
Date: January 23, 2010 10:09AM

Kenny_Powers Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> this is great news guys, its only a matter of time
> now until our country is called United States of
> Coca-Cola. Companies will own us soon.

no....the Incorporated States of America (ISA)

Registered Voter...a Big talking coward..big man on FFXU...little man in life.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: This election brought to you in part by your friendly monopolies.
Posted by: Harry Tuttle ()
Date: January 23, 2010 05:01PM

Vince and @aol apprentice...

A match made in heaven!

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: This election brought to you in part by your friendly monopolies.
Posted by: Dane Bramage ()
Date: January 23, 2010 05:30PM

This sucks, the Unions are going be abusing this big time...

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: This election brought to you in part by your friendly monopolies.
Posted by: Vince(1) ()
Date: January 23, 2010 08:02PM

Dane Bramage Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> This sucks, the Unions are going be abusing this
> big time...


I guess maybe you'd like tocompare the money Unions have compared to Corporations? And a union representing foreign workers in foreign countries has no motivation/interest in our elections...now compare that to foreign corporations in an international market place.

One question for you...are you really that stupid to be afraid of unions? Working people and their representativws arent anything to be afraid of.

Registered Voter...a Big talking coward..big man on FFXU...little man in life.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: This election brought to you in part by your friendly monopolies.
Posted by: Dane Bramage ()
Date: January 24, 2010 02:47PM

Vince(1) Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> One question for you...are you really that stupid...

You seem angry, Vince. While this decision generally favors the Republicans, there is ample money and special interests on the left and right. Moveon, Soros and all those leftist LA celebrities to name a few.

Regardless, you seem to paint everything black or white. There are shades of gray. The reason why the right is having a resurgence is because the moderate independents are mad at the left. We can and will get just as mad at the right.

The key to being successful is to find that common middle that appeals to the middle, not the Rush Limbaughs or the Arianna Huffingtons out there.

Hope you have a peaceful Sunday. Perhaps take a break from here and watch some football.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: This election brought to you in part by your friendly monopolies.
Posted by: Vince(1) ()
Date: January 24, 2010 04:24PM

Dane Bramage Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Vince(1) Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > One question for you...are you really that
> stupid...
>
> You seem angry, Vince. While this decision
> generally favors the Republicans, there is ample
> money and special interests on the left and right.
> Moveon, Soros and all those leftist LA celebrities
> to name a few.
>
> Regardless, you seem to paint everything black or
> white. There are shades of gray. The reason why
> the right is having a resurgence is because the
> moderate independents are mad at the left. We can
> and will get just as mad at the right.
>
> The key to being successful is to find that common
> middle that appeals to the middle, not the Rush
> Limbaughs or the Arianna Huffingtons out there.
>
> Hope you have a peaceful Sunday. Perhaps take a
> break from here and watch some football.


I am mad..at the short sightedness of the American electorate. After 8 years of republican incompetent leadership..the public is ready to judge democratic leadership after 1 year! I concur in the search for middle ground..but when your "loyal opposition" is intent on spreading lies (death squads and a dozen other lies)...it is obvious that compromise is impossible.


Personally..I think more people on the left should be mad...republicans fill the Mall with angry teabaggers and everything is hunky dorry...let someone on the left be mad..and they are raging delusionalists.

Hell..Im a Indianapolis fan..how am I gonna calm down? just a joke.

Registered Voter...a Big talking coward..big man on FFXU...little man in life.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: This election brought to you in part by your friendly monopolies.
Posted by: Made in America ()
Date: January 24, 2010 11:35PM

McCain-Feingold was signed in 2002. In 2010, can anyone point to any evidence that our political environment is fairer, more open, less expensive, or less corrupted than eight years ago?

Corporate money was already involved in influencing campaigns; after McCain-Feingold, it was laundered through PACs, 527s, corporate executives and board members, etc., etc.

The ruling really doesn't affect large powerful corporations one way or the other, because they always have the power to influence legislators through lobbying or private meetings.

The money will just be more transparent now.

What the ruling does do is empower smaller companies and individuals to band together to increase their ability to get their own messages out to the voters.

Corporations come in all sizes, from simple Chapter S corporations to General Motors.

The big difference from a practical political standpoint is Chapter S corporations don't get government bailouts.

This ruling is a net plus for all the corporations who fall below the "I can buy one or more Congressmen" threshold. Which is of course most of them.

The playing field is still far from level.

Corporations will have to spend real earned and taxed money on partisan ads.

The media corporations - ABC, NBC, CNN, CBS, The New York Times, etc - will still have the free use of partisan ads on their own media outlet 24/7 in the form of "news shows" and articles.


Kenny_Powers Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> this is great news guys, its only a matter of time
> now until our country is called United States of
> Coca-Cola. Companies will own us soon.

Lobbying congress seems to have worked pretty well for the mega-corps in our system of crony-capitalism, so far. It's not too high-profile, either.

I'm not so sure how quick a company like Coca-Cola or a Proctor and Gamble would be to so publicly support one candidate or party over another and risk alienating a good chunk of their consumer base when it seems fairly easy to get them to pull advertising from shows, publications etc. that are deemed "too controversial" as it is.

Why would, say, Walmart support Scott Brown in the recent Massachusetts race, and alienate 47% of their potential customers in that state who voted against Brown? The same logic applies to most for-profit corporations.

But the ruling will, to an extent, reduce the influence of lobbyists.

Corporations will no longer have to go thru lobbyists to voice their opinions. They can just run an ad, and we get to see it instead of it happening behind closed doors.

The current market is the lobbyists, which funnels all the cash and benefits to the politicians in power.

This decision makes it possible to take the case directly to the people, to put politicians in power who agree with the policies of the corporations, rather than have them secretly pay off the existing politicians via lobbyists.



On a somewhat different but related note, it is certainly amusing to watch Obama attacking corporate interests in the front room, while accepting their money behind closed doors in the backroom.

With its ruling today, the Supreme Court has given a green light to a new stampede of special interest money in our politics. It is a major victory for big oil, Wall Street banks, health insurance companies and the other powerful interests that marshal their power every day in Washington to drown out the voices of everyday Americans. This ruling gives the special interests and their lobbyists even more power in Washington--while undermining the influence of average Americans who make small contributions to support their preferred candidates. That's why I am instructing my Administration to get to work immediately with Congress on this issue. We are going to talk with bipartisan Congressional leaders to develop a forceful response to this decision. The public interest requires nothing less. http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/statement-president-todays-supreme-court-decision-0

So Barry, will you set the example and give back all the corporate money you and your campaign took?

Obama had Bill Gates & Warren Buffet, the two richest men in the world, not to mention convicted felon http://newsgroups.derkeiler.com/Archive/Misc/misc.invest.stocks/2008-05/msg00769.html and former Nazi bagman http://sweetness-light.com/archive/george-soros-on-helping-the-nazis-during-the-holocaust George Soros on his side in 2008.

Also Time-Warner, Goldman-Sachs, General Electric, Citigroup, IBM, Microsoft, J P Morgan Chase: http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/contrib.php?cycle=2008&cid=N00009638

The "fat cats" gave more to Obama than McCain by a wide margin.

Obama was the first presidential candidate in history to refuse public financing of his campaign so that he could suck in MORE money than this opponent. (I rather enjoyed the spectacle of McCain being hoisted by his own petard....)

Obama promised up and down that he would never rely upon private campaign funding running for President.

He promised to accept public financing for his Presidential run if his opponent did the same.

He broke that promise with the incomprehensible excuse that "the public system is broken" when everyone, even his supporters, understood he became a hypocrite as soon as he discovered he could stuff his pants with far more cash by rejecting public campaign finance.

He ran a website for donations that deliberately ignored FEC regulations on identifying donors, and his site did not even bother to check credit card numbers to see if foreign donors were buying him off.

Rather than truly deal with health care reform, he brought the health care industry into the room to reward them with trillions of dollars if they went along with his plans to destroy health care.

He already has the corporate money in his pocket, that's why he's so ticked off that now all of us are free to band together and support his opposition.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: This election brought to you in part by your friendly monopolies.
Posted by: Made in America ()
Date: January 25, 2010 12:28AM

McCain-Feingold was signed in 2002. In 2010, can anyone point me to any evidence that our political environment is fairer, more open, less expensive, or less corrupted than eight years ago?

Throughout that period, corporate money was heavily involved in influencing campaigns, albeit laundered through PACs, 527s, corporate executives and board members, etc., etc.

The money will just be more transparent now.

The ruling really doesn't affect large powerful corporations one way or the other, because they always have the power to influence legislators through lobbying or private meetings.

What the ruling does do is empower smaller companies and individuals to band together to increase their ability to get their own messages out to the voters.

Corporations come in all sizes, from simple Chapter S corporations to General Motors.

The big difference from a practical political standpoint is Chapter S corporations don't get government bailouts.

This ruling is a net plus for all the corporations who fall below the "I can buy one or more Congressmen" threshold. Which is of course most of them.

The playing field is still far from level.

These corporations will spend real earned and taxed money on partisan ads.

Media corporations - ABC, NBC, CNN, CBS, The New York Times, etc - will still have the free use of partisan ads on their own media outlet 24/7 in the form of "news shows" and articles.

The ruling will also, to an extent, reduce the influence of lobbyists.

Corporations will no longer have to go thru lobbyists to voice their opinions. They can just run an ad, and we get to see it instead of it happening behind closed doors.

The current market is the lobbyists, which funnels all the cash and benefits to the politicians in power.

This decision makes it possible to take the case directly to the people, to put politicians in power who agree with the policies of the corporations, rather than have them secretly pay off the existing politicians via lobbyists.


Kenny_Powers Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> this is great news guys, its only a matter of time
> now until our country is called United States of
> Coca-Cola. Companies will own us soon.

I'm not so sure how quick a company like Coca-Cola or a Proctor and Gamble would be to so publicly support one candidate or party over another and risk alienating a good chunk of their consumer base when it seems fairly easy to get them to pull advertising from shows, publications etc. that are deemed "too controversial" as it is.


On a somewhat different but related note, it is certainly amusing to watch Obama attacking corporate interests in the front room, while accepting their money behind closed doors in the backroom.

With its ruling today, the Supreme Court has given a green light to a new stampede of special interest money in our politics. It is a major victory for big oil, Wall Street banks, health insurance companies and the other powerful interests that marshal their power every day in Washington to drown out the voices of everyday Americans. This ruling gives the special interests and their lobbyists even more power in Washington--while undermining the influence of average Americans who make small contributions to support their preferred candidates. That's why I am instructing my Administration to get to work immediately with Congress on this issue. We are going to talk with bipartisan Congressional leaders to develop a forceful response to this decision. The public interest requires nothing less. http://thepage.time.com/obama-statement-on-citizens-united-v-fec/

So Barry, will you set the example and give back all the corporate money you and your campaign took?

He had Bill Gates & Warren Buffet, the two richest men in the world, not to mention convicted felon http://newsgroups.derkeiler.com/Archive/Misc/misc.invest.stocks/2008-05/msg00769.html and former Nazi bagman http://sweetness-light.com/archive/george-soros-on-helping-the-nazis-during-the-holocaust George Soros on his side in 2008.

Also Time-Warner, Goldman-Sachs, General Electric, Citigroup, IBM, Microsoft, J P Morgan Chase: http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/contrib.php?cycle=2008&cid=N00009638

The "fat cats" gave more to Obama than McCain by a wide margin.

Obama was the first presidential candidate in history to refuse public financing of his campaign so that he could suck in MORE money than this opponent. (I rather enjoyed the spectacle of McCain being hoisted by his own petard....)

Obama promised up and down that he would never rely upon private campaign funding running for President.

He promised to accept public financing for his Presidential run if his opponent did the same.

He broke that promise with the incomprehensible excuse that "the public system is broken" when everyone, even his supporters, understood he became a hypocrite as soon as he discovered he could stuff his pants with far more cash by rejecting public campaign finance.

He ran a website for donations that deliberately ignored FEC regulations on identifying donors, and his site did not even bother to check credit card numbers to see if foreign donors were buying him off.

We all just watched the spectacle of the Pharma and Health Insurance industries meeting behind closed doors with the White House, and in exchange for protections in pending legislation, agreeing to massive ad buys to support the Administration's proposals. But it would supposedly corrupt this pristine system for a Massachusetts local chamber of commerce to buy an ad supporting Scott Brown due to his opposition to Obamacare.

Obama already has the corporate money in his pocket, that's why he's so ticked off that now all of us are free to band together and support his opposition.

Options: ReplyQuote


Your Name: 
Your Email (Optional): 
Subject: 
Attach a file
  • No file can be larger than 75 MB
  • All files together cannot be larger than 300 MB
  • 30 more file(s) can be attached to this message
Spam prevention:
Please, enter the code that you see below in the input field. This is for blocking bots that try to post this form automatically.
  ******    **    **  **     **   *******   **       
 **    **    **  **   **     **  **     **  **       
 **           ****    **     **         **  **       
 **   ****     **     *********   *******   **       
 **    **      **     **     **         **  **       
 **    **      **     **     **  **     **  **       
  ******       **     **     **   *******   ******** 
This forum powered by Phorum.