When I read this decision, I was shocked. The Supreme Court decided that corporations are allowed to spend unregulated amounts of money in support or opposition to political candidates. The decision was a 5-4 split with the opposition offering a scathing rebuttal. The logic was that the laws in place to regulate the amount of money corporations spend on campaigns stifle free speech. The ruling was made on the basis that corporations are ‘people.’
I strongly encourage you read up on this decision for yourself:
NY Times Original Article, NY Times Editor’s debate, NY Times ‘The Caucus,’
I have an obvious bias against this ruling, but it is not all bad. It also allows unions and non-profits to spend without regulation. However, the fact that corporations are now able to throw an unlimited amount of money at (or against) a candidate is so monumental the rest is dwarfed.
Can you imagine:
-FOX being able to make and air an unlimited amount of political commercials on all their channels, including during shows like American Idol.
-Exxon being able to fully fund a wide release propaganda movie discrediting a candidate they dont like.
-Google buying a half hour long special for or against an candidate on a major network.
-Coca-Cola being able to pay for an unlimited amount of billboards or canvassers for a candidate.
Well these are all now a reality. The only catch is that the corporations still have to disclose that they are funding their ads. One Justice, Clarence Thomas, wanted to even get rid of this. So far there has been a general outcry against this decision, with the exception of some Republican politicians.
These laws have been in place since 1907 with the Tillman Act. Since then, they have been strengthened by the 1947 Taft-Harvey Act and the McCain-Feingold Act, as well as being upheld multiple times by previous Supreme Court rulings in the 1990s.
This case was brought to the court by the producers of Hillary: The Movie, which was a 90 min long movie defaming Hillary Clinton that was denied distribution because it is a political advertisement.
President Obama issued a statement calling on Congress to “develop a forceful response to this decision.”
I’ve never really understood the Christian Conservative mentality. I mean, I always thought it was dangerous to mix religion with trickle-down economics. Literally, I thought it must simply be a lack of information or a lack of situational awareness. Apparently I’ve never delved deep enough into the dark psyche of the Christian right.
It all started when I stumbled across the response to the Haitian earthquake disaster from Pat Robertson’s ”The 700 Club”. Planet Earth’s natural crustal activities aside, Robertson’s placed the blame (yes, apparently earthquakes can have blame) squarely at the feet of the Haitian people. He stated, “They were under the heel of the French … and they got together and swore a pact with the devil. They said, ‘We will serve you if you’ll get us free from the French.’ ” God, never being known for quick response time, decided to punish the people of Haiti two hundred years later.
At first this entire affair just seems like one very sad old man with the unfortunate disadvantage of having a camera follow him around to catch his more senior moments. But when I truly think about the implications of his argument, I begin to get very afraid that these people might one day again be in a position to influence our global policy.
We have to deal with the notion that God causes earthquakes, or simply causes natural disasters in general. Scientific discipline aside, the implication is that all worldly disasters can be interpreted as divine retribution, rather than natural disasters. I feel that this leads you down a road where the moral obligation to help our fellow people diminishes. Why would a nation (a Christian nation as I am often reminded by conservative family) help people who are being punished for their satanist affiliations? Foreign aid gets hit hard from conservatives, but I always thought it had to do with the desire to pass the savings on to we, the yacht consumers. I’m starting to sense symptoms of a far more disturbing world view. That these less fortunate nations have brought it all on themselves and are worthy of nothing but contempt.
It is a truly remarkable that a world-view exists where our fabulously excessive wealth can be attributed to divine favor, while the crushing poverty felt by the people we exploit can be conveniently be dropped on Satan’s doorstep. This, from people who follow a religion started by a man who stated that the poor shall inherit the Earth.
Luckily our President is Barrack Obama, and on the way to Haiti is desperately needed relief.
Donate online at as.ucsb.edu and Associated Students will match up to $25,000.
Haiti suffered a 7.2 earthquake yesterday that destroyed almost all infrastructure, including the parliament building, high security prisons, and many major hospitals. Early estimates of the death toll are around 500,000 people and the Red Cross says at least a third of Haiti’s 9 million people are in need of emergency aid. AP Report
All international humanitarian relief organizations are in need of support and funding. CNN has compiled a list of links to the major organizations on the ground who are asking for donations.
Google, frustrated with censorship, is threatening to stop service in China. Unfortunately China is censoring this story in their borders.
When I first heard this story, I did not think it was worth spending time writing about. Then the Republicans got ahold of it. Reid said something regarding candidate Obama during the 2008 election that used questionable wordage, but was not malicious. The quote follows:
Reid “believed that the country was ready to embrace a black presidential candidate, especially one such as Obama — a ‘light-skinned’ African American ‘with no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one,’ as he later put it privately.”
So now he’s apologizing, and apologizing, and apologizing. President Obama had forgiven him. Jessie Jackson has forgiven him. Al Sharpton has forgiven him. Every prominent black political figure has forgiven him (he called each one).
In fact, the only people who are upset are the Republicans. They are calling for him to resign. hm, sounds fishy.
B T Dub: The author of the book is a republican who still strongly supports Strom Thurmond.
The appeals process that will eventually lead to the US Supreme Court have begun in California. This trial questions the constitutionality of denying Americans basic rights on a national level. The two attorneys defending gay marriage were each other’s opposing council in the case Bush v Gore, which decided the outcome of the 2000 election.
Defenders of Prop 8 are arguing ” that because same-sex marriage still is a social experiment, it is wise for states like California to take a wait-and-see approach. Their witnesses will testify that governments historically have sanctioned traditional marriage as a way to promote responsible child-rearing and that this remains a valid justification for limiting marriage to a man and a woman.”
You can now collect your bet winnings.
The contract is as a ‘contributor’ so she does not have a show… yet.
So Californians are apparently upset about the state of their state. Who would have guessed. There are upwards of 30 ballot initiatives ranging from a Constitutional Convention to ending ballot initiatives poised to be split between the June and Fall elections.
Yes, its true. The Governator’s new proposed budget has shifted spending from prisons to schools. The money currently being spent on prisons will be made up by allowing private prisons to compete with state run ones. He also has proposed a constitutional change stating that the government can not spend more money on prisons than schools. Though this sounds great, it has its problems, as this Calitics article points out. The budget still is facing a $20 billion deficit.
Schwarzenegger: ”Thirty years ago 10 percent of the general fund went to higher education and 3 percent went to prisons. Today almost 11 percent goes to prisons and only 7½ percent goes to higher education. Spending 45 percent more on prisons than universities is no way to proceed into the future.”
