PAXIMUS
Registered user
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2009
- Messages
- 3,047
- Reaction score
- 38
Actually its how things have always been but 1,000+ times worse. I think this year's elections are going to be extremely interesting, to say the least. Here's a good article posted at Business Week:
http://www.businessweek.com/news/20...n-may-bring-cascade-of-spending-update1-.html
Some quotes from the above article:
"Insurers affected by pending health-care legislation, such as Indianapolis-based Wellpoint Inc., and banks targeted by President Barack Obamas proposal yesterday to curb risk taking, such as New York-based JPMorgan Chase & Co., are among entities now able to spend unlimited amounts to help elect or defeat federal candidates.
Yesterdays 5-4 ruling reverses a centurys worth of federal legislation and court decisions limiting the influence of corporate money in politics. . .
The decision drastically alters the landscape for candidates and political parties, said Benjamin Ginsberg, a partner at Patton Boggs LLP in Washington and former counsel to President George W. Bushs 2000 and 2004 campaigns. We can expect much more spending, a virtual cascade of spending, by outside groups.
Good read here about this:
http://www.sott.net/articles/show/2...rmann-Special-Comment-On-Supreme-Court-Ruling
Transcript
Finally tonight, as promised, a Special Comment on the Supreme Court's ruling today in the case titled "Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission."
On the cold morning of Friday, March 6th, 1857, a very old man who was born just eight months and thirteen days after the Declaration of Independence was adopted; a man who was married to the sister of the man who wrote "The Star Spangled Banner;" a man who was enlightened enough to have freed his own slaves and given pensions to the ones who had become too old to work read aloud, in a reed-thin voice, a very long document.
In it, he ruled on a legal case involving a slave, brought by his owner to live in a free state; yet to remain a slave.
The slave sought his freedom, and sued. And looking back over legal precedent, and the Constitution, and the America in which it was created, this judge ruled that no black man could ever be considered an actual citizen of the United States.
"They had for more than a century before been, regarded as beings of an inferior order, and altogether unfit to associate with the white race, either in social or political relations, and so far unfit, that they had no rights which the white man was bound to respect."
The case, of course, was Dred Scott. The old man was the fifth Chief Justice of the United States of America, Roger Brooke Tawney. And the outcome, he believed, would be to remove the burning question of the abolition of slavery from the political arena for once and for all.
The outcome, in fact, was the Civil War. No American ever made a single bigger misjudgment. No American ever carried the responsibility for the deaths and suffering of more Americans. No American ever was more quickly vilified. Within four years Chief Justice Tawney's rulings were being ignored in the South and the North.