Justice Scalia Has Simple Solution For Critics Of Citizens United

[Lakhota]

By JEFFREY COLLINS

COLUMBIA, S.C. -- U.S. Supreme Court justice Antonin Scalia has a simple solution for people who don't like all the political advertisements unleashed by the court's decision two years ago that ended limits on corporate contributions in political campaigns – change the channel or turn off the TV.

Scalia said the blame for this type of system shouldn't fall on the Supreme Court, which he said decides merely whether the system is legal under the U.S. Constitution. Instead, he said the ones who have to change things are the politicians who created the system and the voters who often reward the candidates who spend the most money.

"If the system seems crazy to you, don't blame it on the court," Scalia said, during a discussion in front of South Carolina lawyers that lasted for more than an hour.

More: Justice Scalia On Unlimited Political Ads: Turn Off The TV

 

[occupied]

He says as he wrings his hands evilly.

 

[whitehall]

You gotta laugh. Lefties cherry pick Soros tax exempt Media Matters scoops about various conservative targets like the Supreme Court Justice they love to hate but they forget that an FDR appointed justice who was a former KKK member wrote the modern opinion on the "separation of church and state" and a liberal majority in the supreme court wrote the majority opinion about a "right to privacy" that didn't exist in the Constitution that paved the way for the modern eugenics movement.

 

[Wiseacre]

Want some cheese with that whine?

The fundraiser in chief is said to be raising close to a billion dollars for his campaign, an awful lot of it from unions. So why shouldn't the GOP be able to get big money from corps and keep things fairly even?

 

[Oddball]

They also ignore the fact that they own 527s.

 

[occupied]

Corporate personhood will be the downfall of what democracy we have left and this guy washing his hands of the matter does not excuse his role in the matter. We know what he enabled and we know why he did it.

 

[Oddball]

Repeal the 14th Amendment.

Problem solved.

 

[Wiseacre]

Corporate personhood will be the downfall of what democracy we have left and this guy washing his hands of the matter does not excuse his role in the matter. We know what he enabled and we know why he did it.

Really sucks when the other side has almost as much money as you do.

 

[occupied]

Corporate personhood will be the downfall of what democracy we have left and this guy washing his hands of the matter does not excuse his role in the matter. We know what he enabled and we know why he did it.

Really sucks when the other side has almost as much money as you do.

Yes, getting a choice between Romney and Gingrich must be so fucking wonderful.

 

[rdean]

By JEFFREY COLLINS

COLUMBIA, S.C. -- U.S. Supreme Court justice Antonin Scalia has a simple solution for people who don't like all the political advertisements unleashed by the court's decision two years ago that ended limits on corporate contributions in political campaigns – change the channel or turn off the TV.

Scalia said the blame for this type of system shouldn't fall on the Supreme Court, which he said decides merely whether the system is legal under the U.S. Constitution. Instead, he said the ones who have to change things are the politicians who created the system and the voters who often reward the candidates who spend the most money.

"If the system seems crazy to you, don't blame it on the court," Scalia said, during a discussion in front of South Carolina lawyers that lasted for more than an hour.

More: Justice Scalia On Unlimited Political Ads: Turn Off The TV

Republicans call this guy an "intellectual".

Scalia: Constitution does not protect women against discrimination

 

[Quantum Windbag]

By JEFFREY COLLINS

COLUMBIA, S.C. -- U.S. Supreme Court justice Antonin Scalia has a simple solution for people who don't like all the political advertisements unleashed by the court's decision two years ago that ended limits on corporate contributions in political campaigns – change the channel or turn off the TV.

Scalia said the blame for this type of system shouldn't fall on the Supreme Court, which he said decides merely whether the system is legal under the U.S. Constitution. Instead, he said the ones who have to change things are the politicians who created the system and the voters who often reward the candidates who spend the most money.

"If the system seems crazy to you, don't blame it on the court," Scalia said, during a discussion in front of South Carolina lawyers that lasted for more than an hour.

More: Justice Scalia On Unlimited Political Ads: Turn Off The TV

I do that all the time, you should try it. There are lots of channels out there, watching only one is stupid.

 

[Wiseacre]

Corporate personhood will be the downfall of what democracy we have left and this guy washing his hands of the matter does not excuse his role in the matter. We know what he enabled and we know why he did it.

Really sucks when the other side has almost as much money as you do.

Yes, getting a choice between Romney and Gingrich must be so fucking wonderful.

Kinda dodged the issue a little bit there. Don't you think it oughta be relatively even between the dems and the repubs in terms of money?

 

[Lakhota]

Pawlenty Defends Unlimited Campaign Donations As Citizens United Celebrates Two-Year Anniversary | ThinkProgress

FEC Republicans Are Making Citizens United Even Worse | ThinkProgress

Yes, the above links have supporting links...

 

[Oddball]

Tissue?

 

[occupied]

Really sucks when the other side has almost as much money as you do.

Yes, getting a choice between Romney and Gingrich must be so fucking wonderful.

Kinda dodged the issue a little bit there. Don't you think it oughta be relatively even between the dems and the repubs in terms of money?

What are you suggesting? That there should be some kind of arbitrary level playing field here? The answer is NO if it means that the big money donations are buying undue access at the expense of regular working people.

 

[Lakhota]

How could any logical person think that Citizens United gives corporations and unions "equal" political power? That's like saying unions are as powerful and rich as corporations.

 

[Oddball]

Ain't free speech a bitch?

 

[Wiseacre]

Pawlenty Defends Unlimited Campaign Donations As Citizens United Celebrates Two-Year Anniversary | ThinkProgress

FEC Republicans Are Making Citizens United Even Worse | ThinkProgress

Yes, the above links have supporting links...

The total spending in the 2010 elections was fairly even between repubs and dems, and Obama is expected to raise close to a billion dollars this time. Why shouldn't we have an even playing field, I thought equality was what you guys are all about.

 

[Wiseacre]

How could any logical person think that Citizens United gives corporations and unions "equal" political power? That's like saying unions are as powerful and rich as corporations.

I cannot believe you are saying this after all the political power the unions have shown over the past 2 years.

 

[Wiseacre]

Yes, getting a choice between Romney and Gingrich must be so fucking wonderful.

Kinda dodged the issue a little bit there. Don't you think it oughta be relatively even between the dems and the repubs in terms of money?

What are you suggesting? That there should be some kind of arbitrary level playing field here? The answer is NO if it means that the big money donations are buying undue access at the expense of regular working people.

So it's okay for the unions to spend hundreds of millions on dem campaigns, for which they are rewarded by Obama and the dems, but the GOP cannot get equally as much money from the big corps?

Undue access? You gotta be shitting me, you don't think the unions are getting undue access to the WH? Your credibility is taking a huge hit, man.