Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Thanks Crown, cap and sick. Though I'd appreciate more if you guys would spread the word to friends, family, whatever message boards, social networks, Senators & Representatives etc that there are Constitutional powers in place that can reverse the dilemma that the corporate activist judges placed our democracy in.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kovert
And as you are so respectful of the law, you well know that impeachment, Congress deciding the right wing majority (actually) made a decision outside of their jurisdiction and thus nulling the ruling; or adding more judges (appointed by the Pres.) to the court is well within the powers granted in our beloved Constitution to check the power of the Supreme Court. After all, checks and balances is one of the elements that makes our nation so democratic!
The issue the court addressed was the notion that a political Ad, or movie in this case, was deemed in violation of M-F because a group of people banded together, with money and resources, to fund the Hillary movie.
That was a wrong perpetrated on free speech that the court has set right. All other restrictions remain.
Why the angst?
We now need a Constitutional Amendment requiring the separation of speech and money.
You can put your money where your mouth is, but that doesn't make money a mouth. If it did, we wouldn't need the 2nd Amendment to shoot an attacker - we could just incorporate a gun, and give it the 1st Amendment right to "speak".
Opponents of Roe v Wade consistently call it an "activist" decision by claiming that calling abortion a "right to privacy" under the the Due Process clause in the 14th Amendment is bad law.
I'm sure you realize that even people who where happy with the decision still considered it bad law, with no basis in fact for the decision...these are pro-abortion leftists I'm talking about, who admit that SCOTUS pulled the ruling out of it a**.
Thanks Crown, cap and sick. Though I'd appreciate more if you guys would spread the word to friends, family, whatever message boards, social networks, Senators & Representatives etc that there are Constitutional powers in place that can reverse the dilemma that the corporate activist judges placed our democracy in.
Again, a good place to start is to sign this online petition. Signatures are already approaching 100,000 and growing each second!
If a President can be brought up on impeachment charges for oral play but judges that have literally placed a For Sale signacross Lady Liberty get a pass, American natural person citizens deserve their coming disenfranchisement and serfdom.
Bill Clinton was charged with perjury, but nobody remembers that.
If a President can be brought up on impeachment charges for oral play but judges that have literally placed a For Sale signacross Lady Liberty get a pass, American natural person citizens deserve their coming disenfranchisement and serfdom.
Only if he is a lying snake, that perjures himself in front of a federal judge.
Scooter Libby was prosecuted for lying to a judge, so was Clinton. Get over it already.
Bill Clinton was charged with perjury, but nobody remembers that.
Just like people forget about who (mis)lead us into wars at the cost of millions of lives and billions of dollars; or who ripped off Main Street and not only got away Scott free but milk them again and still refuses to lend a dime.
But yet to some, it makes sense that a Spitzer or Billie deserve punishment for doing a natural act which organisms have been doing for millions of years.
Americans, a lot of the times we deserve what we get.
Bill Clinton was charged with perjury, but nobody remembers that.
Even if he had been charged with murder, that does not excuse the actions of the conservatives on the Supreme Court for this disasterous rulling! Two wrongs DO NOT make a right! What they have done is to kill democracy. . . .in favor of greed and run away capatialism. . . .
Even if he had been charged with murder, that does not excuse the actions of the conservatives on the Supreme Court for this disasterous rulling! Two wrongs DO NOT make a right! What they have done is to kill democracy. . . .in favor of greed and run away capatialism. . . .
no what they have done is saved one of the freedoms that we americans cherish
ever heard of the concept of freedom of speech????
it you say they are not 'people' then they cant have an OPINION...therefore a corporation like the New York Times cant ENDORSE a candidate. therefore a CORPORATION like the DNC cant give their candidate ANYMONEY
are you saying that corporations (even big bad BANKS) should have NO OPINION or VIEW (ie FREEDOM OF SPEECH) as to what laws politicians are making that WILL EFFECT THEM?????
are you saying that move-on.org(a corporation) should not have the RIGHT to take out a full page add in the New York Times(another corporation) staing their OPINION or View of a certain political subject????
if a "corporation" shall have no rights or 'personhood' then it there by ELIMINATES that corporation, which LIMITS freedom of speech....IE if I (a person) want to take out an ad in a newspaper (a CORPORTAION), then I would not be allowed (ie loss of rights), because said vehicle(newspaper) is a corporation..............
I am not saying that I like it, but you do understand that once you start limiting RIGHTS(even to a corporation), then you are EMPOWERING the GOVERNMENT and leading to totalitarianism......"1984" rings a bell
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.