Buying Votes Protected Free Speech?

[hortysir]

Because people are ignorant of what the Citizens United decision was, and the full extent of their knowledge is the "corporations are people" meme they have heard, we get topics like this one based on a false premise, which of course leads to ridiculous conclusions.

Wow!!

Didn't take long for your post to be verified!

It's nothing more than legalized bribery.

 

[bripat9643]

In the earlier republican debates Newt made a big deal out of not attacking his fellow republican candidates. He defended them & blasted moderators who tried to bait them into attacking each-other. In the last debate as now Newt is a paid attack dog sicked on fellow republican candidate Mitt Romney. Newt has done a complete 180 flip that may be due to that $3 million bribe you speak of.

Wrong. It's due to the millions Romney spent attacking Newt before the Iowa caucus. You have to be totally clueless to not understand that.

 

[g5000]

It was cheaper to bribe Newt than Romney. They would have to spend more to change Romney's mind. They hope Newt will sink Romney.

What is Newt doing for his friend he would not otherwise have done without a bribe?

In the earlier republican debates Newt made a big deal out of not attacking his fellow republican candidates. He defended them & blasted moderators who tried to bait them into attacking each-other. In the last debate as now Newt is a paid attack dog sicked on fellow republican candidate Mitt Romney. Newt has done a complete 180 flip that may be due to that $3 million bribe you speak of.

Newt was attacking Romney before the rich guy came along. Being a hypocrite if it will achieve success and power is what Newt is all about.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

It doesn't "favor" Republicans.

Democrats receive just as much money as Republicans do, from Unions and Corporations - all allowed by Citizens United.

It favors republicans because their conservative PACs make greater use of attack ads and the like, which are mostly devoid of facts, than democrats, who are mostly inept at such things.

Just remember - Citizen's United applies to unions and left-wing special interests too.

True. Who for the most part have no idea how to use such a political weapon.

Funny how people keep saying that, yet Democrats and their PACS outspent Republicans and their PACs in 2010.

It’s not the amount spent, but efficacy.

Conservative and republican PACs don’t spend money attempting to convince liberals and democrats to vote for republican candidates, they spend the money to keep the base fired up; democrats and liberals have no such corresponding base.

 

[hortysir]

It doesn't "favor" Republicans.

Democrats receive just as much money as Republicans do, from Unions and Corporations - all allowed by Citizens United.

It favors republicans because their conservative PACs make greater use of attack ads and the like, which are mostly devoid of facts, than democrats, who are mostly inept at such things.

Just remember - Citizen's United applies to unions and left-wing special interests too.

True. Who for the most part have no idea how to use such a political weapon.

Funny how people keep saying that, yet Democrats and their PACS outspent Republicans and their PACs in 2010.

It’s not the amount spent, but efficacy.

Conservative and republican PACs don’t spend money attempting to convince liberals and democrats to vote for republican candidates, they spend the money to keep the base fired up; democrats and liberals have no such corresponding base.

Did you really type all of that with a straight face?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

It favors republicans because their conservative PACs make greater use of attack ads and the like, which are mostly devoid of facts, than democrats, who are mostly inept at such things. [/quote

Democrats are mostly inept at attack ads? On what fucking planet?

True. Who for the most part have no idea how to use such a political weapon.

Do you mean all those attacks on the Tea partiers, and specifically on Sharron Angle, that worked so well, were just luck? Are you aware that the Democrats have the vast talents of Hollywood, major ad agencies, and the unions, to draw on if the scumbag politicians have sudden onset senile dementia and forget all their native talents?

It’s not the amount spent, but efficacy.

Conservative and republican PACs don’t spend money attempting to convince liberals and democrats to vote for republican candidates, they spend the money to keep the base fired up; democrats and liberals have no such corresponding base.

That explains why Meg Whitman is the governor of California now, Democrats have no base to get fired up over her anti immigration, anti union, nurse bashing platform.