Are you a 20%er?

Discussion in 'Law and Justice System' started by Wry Catcher, Feb 18, 2010.

  1. Wry Catcher
    Offline

    Wry Catcher Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2009
    Messages:
    31,779
    Thanks Received:
    4,245
    Trophy Points:
    1,160
    Location:
    San Francisco Bay Area
    Ratings:
    +8,167
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  2. Baruch Menachem
    Offline

    Baruch Menachem '

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2008
    Messages:
    14,204
    Thanks Received:
    3,235
    Trophy Points:
    185
    Ratings:
    +3,305
    I guess this is just one of the occasions where 80% of the population is wrong. It won't be the first time, it won't be the last.

    [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ss1CXo8QMi8]YouTube - OKLAHOMA "The Surrey With The Fringe On Top" with lyrics[/ame]
     
  3. ItHappens
    Offline

    ItHappens BANNED

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2010
    Messages:
    331
    Thanks Received:
    44
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +44
    So 80% is really the percentage of persons in this country who can't think for themselves?
    I'd thought it'd be higher.
     
  4. del
    Offline

    del BANNED

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2008
    Messages:
    45,052
    Thanks Received:
    9,830
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +9,885
    me too.

    :eusa_whistle:
     
  5. JimH52
    Offline

    JimH52 Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2007
    Messages:
    19,277
    Thanks Received:
    3,103
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Location:
    US
    Ratings:
    +8,266
  6. Bern80
    Offline

    Bern80 Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Messages:
    8,094
    Thanks Received:
    720
    Trophy Points:
    138
    Ratings:
    +726
    The fact that people don't like the ramifications of the decision (including myself) does not mean the USSC made the wrong decision.

    The role of the superme court is to hear cases in which there is a question of constiutionality. It simply can't be argued that there is something unconstitutional about alloying anyone and everyone to donate as much or as little as they would like to someone's campaign. This is considered a form of free speech.

    If they had gone the other way, then you actually would have an issue of constitutionality because you would have to come up with a good argument as to why corporations should or even very rich people should not have the protection of the first ammendment.

    It isn't the job of the courts to fix unfairness in the system. Congress has to do that (and I believe are).
     
    Last edited: Feb 18, 2010
  7. George Costanza
    Offline

    George Costanza A Friendly Liberal

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2009
    Messages:
    5,179
    Thanks Received:
    1,087
    Trophy Points:
    155
    Location:
    Los Angeles area.
    Ratings:
    +1,187
    Prior to this recent decision, campaign spending was limited on the theory that the evils it creates outweigh the right of corporations to free speech. The only reason that rule has been changed is that we now have a conservative majority on The Supremes.

    First of many, I am sad to say . . .
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  8. antagon
    Offline

    antagon The Man

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2009
    Messages:
    3,572
    Thanks Received:
    285
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +286
    did you guys miss that direct contribution limits remain unchanged?
     
  9. boedicca
    Offline

    boedicca Uppity Water Nymph Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2007
    Messages:
    41,834
    Thanks Received:
    12,786
    Trophy Points:
    2,250
    Location:
    The Land of Funk
    Ratings:
    +22,858

    If 20% opposing the SCOTUS bill is a valid reason to overturn the decision - they 53%+ of the population opposing ObamaCare is more than a valid reason for the bill to be abandoned.

    Just sayin'.
     
  10. boedicca
    Offline

    boedicca Uppity Water Nymph Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2007
    Messages:
    41,834
    Thanks Received:
    12,786
    Trophy Points:
    2,250
    Location:
    The Land of Funk
    Ratings:
    +22,858

    Campaign spending wasn't really limited prior to this decision. Candidates can raise as much money as they are able (unless they do federal matching) - and other organizations can spend a great deal of money advocating on issues related to the campaign. (There's also the huge ability to commit fraud via donations on the internet that financed Obama's campaign, but that's another topic.)
     

Share This Page