So am still curious how does more corporate money in the hands of elected officials benefit anyone? Really doesn't that mean they can be bought earlier rather than later? On both sides!

Trent Reznor. That's nine inch nails, dude.

If the GOP is going to win so many battles now that corporate campaign contributions are easier, why did Obama outspend McCain in 2008 by a factor of 2 ?

http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/

I don't see any party winning, I see TV viewers losing by having to watch more attack ads.

-John

Too embarrassed to put a link that would identify Connolly's employer as Newsweek or forgetful! Is Obama on the cover again?

Hard to believe Connolly would have such and opinion after all Katie received her Master of Public Policy from Harvard's Kennedy School of Government, where she was the 2005 Menzies Scholar.

This is horrible. Now the chances of a third party getting any power are slim to nill unless they have a huge corperation pumping vast amounts of money into them.

Half of congress is already bought off, now the rest is going to be.


This is a horrible day for this country.

Hatt that is exaclty how I feel......too many people in too many companies pockets both R and D

there's no left here. examples of real left-wing parties can be found in western european democracies. they have communists, socialists, workers' parties, etc. all those disappeared here long ago.

surely you can come up with a better response than attacking the messenger, no?

or perhaps you will now attack someone else?

Simple answer is: It Doesn't.

While I am against it, I don't believe we can nor should we pick and choose which decisions we should support any more than our President or elected officials. After all, look at Bush in 00. You can't support the SCOTUS before and denounce that decision and this one. Sorry if the decision goes against you this time but there it is. Seems to me that the SCOTUS sucks the big one when it goes against what I believe but when it rules in my favor, they are the greatest.

Umm yes I can pick and choose which decisions I support, its called being an adult. And this goes against everyone not just one party or the other.

Wisely. Against it.

"In a powerfully worded, lengthy dissent, Justice John Paul Stevens lamented the decision and called the majority "profoundly misguided." He said, "The court’s ruling threatens to undermine the integrity of elected institutions around the nation." Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer and Sonia Sotomayor joined Stevens' dissent, parts of which he read aloud in the courtroom"

"Hath not a corporation eyes? Hath not a corporation hands, organs, dimensions, senses, affections, passions; fed with the same food, hurt with the same weapons, subject to the same diseases, heal'd by the same means, warm'd and cool'd by the same winter and summer as a human is? If you prick us, do we not bleed? If you tickle us, do we not laugh? If you poison us, do we not die? And if you wrong us, shall we not revenge? If we are like you in the rest, we will resemble you in that.."



feh.


:rolleyes:


:D:D:D:D

No, it is called having double standards. Supporting someone that comes to the same conclusion is worthless. Tells me nothing. Supporting someone that disagrees with you tells me you respect the institution. Think about it. Is the criminal being an adult when he agrees with the court to free him but disagrees with the court when it wants to incarcerate him? IS that the definition of being an adult?

I am not saying you have to agree with them. You have to respect them is all. I don't have to agree with either Bush or Obama but Bush was my President as Obama is. IF you show no respect for the court when they go against you, what is your respect worth when they agree with you? Isn't that the definition of "fair weathered friend"? Bring a roll of C-notes to the bar and buy drinks for everybody. Most will be friends with you. How many will still be friends with you AFTER the money runs out is what counts, isn't it?

They are already being bought so I am not sure this will make that much of a difference. All it means is they don't have to hide it as much.

not to spoil the mood, after out recent love-fest :D, but the court was packed by reagan, bush, and bush II with ideologues, not true legal minds.