An honest question to conservatives.

The Citizens United is an ideologically conservative non-profit group that challenged the Federal Election Commission and aspects of BCR Act of 2002, etc.. I am sure you all know by now..

Read more here.

Basically opening the doors for a ton of Corporate spending in elections.

Do you, as a conservative, agree that this was a good ruling from the supreme court? And furthermore, that it was the right thing for a conservative "limited" government group to do?

Not trying to flame bait, I just want to see what conservative citizens really think about this. :eusa_angel:

I thought you said this was an honest question.

The ACLU filed an amicus brief asking that section 203 of the BCRA be struck down as facially unconstitutional, yet you are calling it a conservative position. That leaves me a little confused, when did the ACLU become a conservative group?

Read much?

I know you are trying to contort what I said in an attempt to be "witty", but your efforts are fruitless.

My question was asking if the ruling that Citizens United forced was viewed as a good one by conservatives. Seeing as the tea party was bent on removing corrupt politicians and bringing accountability back to government, I don't see how undocumented corporate politician buying fits within that goal.

What the ACLU or unions do has nothing to do with this question, yeah they make contributions, I never said that it was good or somehow exempt from the same scrutiny.

Try and stay on topic.
 
The Citizens United is an ideologically conservative non-profit group that challenged the Federal Election Commission and aspects of BCR Act of 2002, etc.. I am sure you all know by now..

Read more here.

Basically opening the doors for a ton of Corporate spending in elections.

Do you, as a conservative, agree that this was a good ruling from the supreme court? And furthermore, that it was the right thing for a conservative "limited" government group to do?

Not trying to flame bait, I just want to see what conservative citizens really think about this. :eusa_angel:

I thought you said this was an honest question.

The ACLU filed an amicus brief asking that section 203 of the BCRA be struck down as facially unconstitutional, yet you are calling it a conservative position. That leaves me a little confused, when did the ACLU become a conservative group?

Read much?

I know you are trying to contort what I said in an attempt to be "witty", but your efforts are fruitless.

My question was asking if the ruling that Citizens United forced was viewed as a good one by conservatives. Seeing as the tea party was bent on removing corrupt politicians and bringing accountability back to government, I don't see how undocumented corporate politician buying fits within that goal.

What the ACLU or unions do has nothing to do with this question, yeah they make contributions, I never said that it was good or somehow exempt from the same scrutiny.

Try and stay on topic.

The ACLU is not making campaign contributions, they sided with Citizen's United in court. How is me pointing out that the decision actually has liberal support off topic? Do you think you own the forum because you posted something in it?
 
I thought you said this was an honest question.

The ACLU filed an amicus brief asking that section 203 of the BCRA be struck down as facially unconstitutional, yet you are calling it a conservative position. That leaves me a little confused, when did the ACLU become a conservative group?

Read much?

I know you are trying to contort what I said in an attempt to be "witty", but your efforts are fruitless.

My question was asking if the ruling that Citizens United forced was viewed as a good one by conservatives. Seeing as the tea party was bent on removing corrupt politicians and bringing accountability back to government, I don't see how undocumented corporate politician buying fits within that goal.

What the ACLU or unions do has nothing to do with this question, yeah they make contributions, I never said that it was good or somehow exempt from the same scrutiny.

Try and stay on topic.

The ACLU is not making campaign contributions, they sided with Citizen's United in court. How is me pointing out that the decision actually has liberal support off topic? Do you think you own the forum because you posted something in it?

It's simple, I have now repeated the question twice, you answered a question with a question (A stupid one at that). :lol: :lol: :lol:

Can't stay on topic, start another thread. I do not approve of what the ACLU did, as far as I am concerned there should be no campaign contributions for either side, public funding, end of story.

Now answer the question: Was it a good ruling for you as a conservative? Does it help remove corruption from our system or improve the condition in any way?
 
Read much?

I know you are trying to contort what I said in an attempt to be "witty", but your efforts are fruitless.

My question was asking if the ruling that Citizens United forced was viewed as a good one by conservatives. Seeing as the tea party was bent on removing corrupt politicians and bringing accountability back to government, I don't see how undocumented corporate politician buying fits within that goal.

What the ACLU or unions do has nothing to do with this question, yeah they make contributions, I never said that it was good or somehow exempt from the same scrutiny.

Try and stay on topic.

The ACLU is not making campaign contributions, they sided with Citizen's United in court. How is me pointing out that the decision actually has liberal support off topic? Do you think you own the forum because you posted something in it?

It's simple, I have now repeated the question twice, you answered a question with a question (A stupid one at that). :lol: :lol: :lol:

Can't stay on topic, start another thread. I do not approve of what the ACLU did, as far as I am concerned there should be no campaign contributions for either side, public funding, end of story.

Now answer the question: Was it a good ruling for you as a conservative? Does it help remove corruption from our system or improve the condition in any way?

Excuse me? I challenged your premise, and pointed out that the ACLU supported Citizens United's position. If you had actually asked an honest question instead of delving into partisan rhetoric I would have answered. Either admit that this is not a partisan issue and then ask the question, or admit that you are a hack.

By the way, you first have to prove the system is corrupt before you can demand solutions. What evidence do you have that politicians are deliberately ignoring the law?
 
Last edited:
Excuse me? I challenged your premise, and pointed out that the ACLU supported Citizens United's position. If you had actually asked an honest question instead of delving into partisan rhetoric I would have answered. Either admit that this is not a partisan issue and then ask the question, or admit that you are a hack.

I never delved into partisan rhetoric, it was an honest question (aside from replies to attacks, not initiated by me). Most people did not see it the same way as you. :lol:

If you go back and read, many conservatives replied with varying answers about how they viewed the ruling, it was interesting. None of them seemed to think it was a partisan or comical question.

If you are implying that it is partisan because I did not include the ACLU in the stated question, if you remember the court case is headed as "citizens united v. federal election commission" making it uniquely, theirs.

By the way, you first have to prove the system is corrupt before you can demand solutions. What evidence do you have that politicians are deliberately ignoring the law?

:lol::lol:

Wait.. :lol:

You are saying that our political system does not suffer from any form of corruption? No money trades hands for favorable outcomes in lawmaking?

In addition:

When did I DEMAND a solution?

This was merely a question asking how people viewed it.
 
The ACLU is not making campaign contributions, they sided with Citizen's United in court. How is me pointing out that the decision actually has liberal support off topic? Do you think you own the forum because you posted something in it?

It's simple, I have now repeated the question twice, you answered a question with a question (A stupid one at that). :lol: :lol: :lol:

Can't stay on topic, start another thread. I do not approve of what the ACLU did, as far as I am concerned there should be no campaign contributions for either side, public funding, end of story.

Now answer the question: Was it a good ruling for you as a conservative? Does it help remove corruption from our system or improve the condition in any way?

What evidence do you have that politicians are deliberately ignoring the law?

Are you fucking kidding!?!
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top