Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission

[feedtheworld]

You know how it's easier to see from outside sometimes?  Like the other UK poster, it seems a stunning decision to me, and I really despair of seeing a great country doing these things to itself.  It's a strong blow to the idea of democracy, surely.  A fraction of a percentage of people with the power to have the loudest voice.  The process continues of making normal people's voices smaller and smaller as it becomes impossible to compete with people/corporations with the most buying/bribing power.  The internet had slightly done us all a favor by returning a voice to the masses (after television had been hijacked by people who wanted to force their opinions on people that couldn't talk back) - it still will have that power, and may be the tool that allows sense to prevail still.

[feedtheworld]

Sorry for the direct lifting from Wikipedia, but..

"First Amendment interpretation

Freedom of speech in the U.S. follows a graduated system, with different types of regulations subject to different levels of scrutiny in court challenges based on the First Amendment, often depending on the type of speech.

Types of Speech

Core Political Speech
This is the most highly guarded form of speech because of its purely expressive nature and importance to a functional democracy. Most simply, core political speech is interactive communications about political ideas or issues that are not motivated by profit."


So, I wonder how they will get past that last part, as that will be their motivation ultimately.  But excuse my not feeling confident that they won't be allowed to ride roughshod all over it.

[feedtheworld]

Yes about Wikipedia.. one leaves themselves wide open when using it without researching what they used.

However, does a thing really need to be written for people to display common decency?  I would suggest that thinly-veiled support of parties as a means to ensure future profits isn't decent, and that needs no constitution to know that.  Just a right-thinking mind.

And (I know I tried to use the Constitution as part of my argument, but that's because I know you all like to fall back on it to determine your morals when you need back-up), whoever gave people a right to tell people that haven't even been born yet, and had no choice WHERE they'd be born what's what... that seems very un-democratic to me, especially as it's main use seems to be getting mis-used by Republicans to further their own cause, which is possible only because it's outdated like them.  But I guess that's for another thread.