Im sure you have been asking yourselves When is Little Jimmy B. going to weigh in on the S.C. decision? and What does LJ think about this? Well wait no more, me hearties. Here is what youve been waiting for. The first amendment says: Congress shall make no law… or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press;… Which together, I understand to mean that the press and people are free to criticize the government without fear of arrest, no matter what the five wise-asses on the S.C. say. The Constitution was talking about actual speech. Now, that amendment notwithstanding, there are limits to free speech. The famous yelling FIRE in a crowded theater. You cannot purger yourself in court, nor can you lie to an FBI agent. You cannot incite to riot or advocate the violent overthrow of the government. I think you see where Im going here - if there can be limits on actual speech, and they want to equate money with speech, why cant there be limits on money/speech? But WAIT! Theres more implied in this decision. Because we live in an increasingly multinational world, I see a mess ahead. Currently, foreign nationals are not allowed to contribute to US campaigns. But these gentlemen, who swore to uphold precedent, decided that Corporations are People, (dont get me started) and are therefore also able to contribute to political campaigns, even though they cant vote in them. Moreover, corporations dont have nationalities. Case in point - if Fiat buys Chrysler, is Chrysler a US company or an Italian one? Can Chrysler contribute to US campaigns then? Consider if Russian Oligarchs got together and bought a bunch of US companies and funneled piles of cash into campaigns, effectively taking over the United States through the ballot box. What does the Tea Partys Dont Tread on Me slogan mean then?
Posted on: Thu, 03 Apr 2014 20:40:06 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015