The GOP's candidacy and Super PAC's

[1NEMESIS]

Citizens United v. FEC
"The Supreme Court's ruling in Citizens United v. FEC has focused America's attention on the dangerous influence of corporate power in our democracy and the urgency of taking all necessary measures to undo that influence, including amending the Constitution."

"Generations of Americans have amended the Constitution over the years to ensure that "We the People" means all the people, not just the privileged few. The Citizens United case, which opened the floodgates to unlimited corporate spending to influence elections at all levels of government, has brought home the importance of amending the Constitution to ensure that "We the People" does not mean we the corporations."

http://www.united4thepeople.org/

Super PAC: A PAC to which corporations, unions, and other organizations can donate freely. These did not exist prior to the Citizens United decision, in which the Supreme Court ruled that corporations must be treated as individuals in terms of having "protected speech", including the right to spend money on political causes; and SpeechNow.org v. FEC, a D.C. Circuit Court decision holding that contribution limits could not apply to political committees that do not make direct contributions to or coordinate their activities with federal candidates. Therefore, unlike regular PACs, they cannot coordinate with individual candidates, and unlike 527 organizations, all contributions to and expenditures by these groups must be disclosed publicly just as federal PAC spending is.

As a result of this SCOTUS ruling(5-4 conservative majority), Super PAC's for the first time have greatly influenced the GOP candidates and how they have pursued their nomination.

Are there any thoughts concerning the influence of Super PAC's on the current GOP race? President Obama also has Super PAC's and this will be an issue then also.

[anaximander]

What progressive commie crap.

Generations have amended the Constitution
Blah blah for the many blah blah privledged few
blah blah

This mentality is eurocraptastic.
The Amendments of the 20th century
were largely hoodwinks to con the
people into giving up their freedoms
and empowering the cent govt.
Lets see
Giving women the vote~ ehh that did open the venue
of looting the treasury ....for the children.
Prohibition/Repeal- nuff said if only the repeal wagon
had kept rolling.....
Creating the IRS and granting it UNLIMITED power
of enforcement with impunity. You are guilty
until you prove otherwise how American is that?
Taking the ability of the States to appoint
their Senators away thereby further weakening
the States(readeople) and further strengthing
the cent govt.

Giving minorities equal rights?
Nah I'm a so called minority and they didn't
give us equal rights. They made us a privledged class.
The emasculation of the anglo males in
this society is appalling. If the libs could
mandate all new born anglo males be castrated
you better friggin believe they would.

So no, I see no proof of a generational
effort to do anything truly beneficial
for anyone from this cent govt that doesn't
have the govts own agenda above all.

AFL-CIO USW UAW CWA- all democrat funding machine
How is it that union money is okay but mgmt money isn't?

Teamsters can buy politicians but not Walmart?
UAW can bankroll the democrat contingency
of the House of Representatives,
But ExxonMobil can't contribute to pacs for
mere PR and lobbying effortd?

Money talks.
Unless you force media groups to give away
production and time- commie RAT
The guy with the deepest pockets will
be heard from longer and louder.

As it should be.
To hell with the poor.
All they do is vote to loot the treasury.

Which won't last much longer

[1NEMESIS]

Originally Posted by anaximander

What progressive commie crap.

Generations have amended the Constitution
Blah blah for the many blah blah privledged few
blah blah

This mentality is eurocraptastic.
The Amendments of the 20th century
were largely hoodwinks to con the
people into giving up their freedoms
and empowering the cent govt.
Lets see
Giving women the vote~ ehh that did open the venue
of looting the treasury ....for the children.
Prohibition/Repeal- nuff said if only the repeal wagon
had kept rolling.....
Creating the IRS and granting it UNLIMITED power
of enforcement with impunity. You are guilty
until you prove otherwise how American is that?
Taking the ability of the States to appoint
their Senators away thereby further weakening
the States(readeople) and further strengthing
the cent govt.

Giving minorities equal rights?
Nah I'm a so called minority and they didn't
give us equal rights. They made us a privledged class.
The emasculation of the anglo males in
this society is appalling. If the libs could
mandate all new born anglo males be castrated
you better friggin believe they would.

So no, I see no proof of a generational
effort to do anything truly beneficial
for anyone from this cent govt that doesn't
have the govts own agenda above all.

AFL-CIO USW UAW CWA- all democrat funding machine
How is it that union money is okay but mgmt money isn't?

Teamsters can buy politicians but not Walmart?
UAW can bankroll the democrat contingency
of the House of Representatives,
But ExxonMobil can't contribute to pacs for
mere PR and lobbying effortd?

Money talks.
Unless you force media groups to give away
production and time- commie RAT
The guy with the deepest pockets will
be heard from longer and louder.

As it should be.
To hell with the poor.
All they do is vote to loot the treasury.

Which won't last much longer

Ok, just make sure you scream this loud and proud and announce your party affiliation, that's the best way to get your message out.

[xfin]

Nemesis, are you the same turd that got booted back in December? Why don't you go to a political site of your choosing and post this crap. We come here for entertainment and other things to escape from this kind of drivel.

[Mokoa]

And now a reminder to stick to the topic of this thread and leave the animosity out of it.

[1NEMESIS]

I don't know why people like these posters would have any reason to support more money in politics whether you're a democrat or a republican.

My posting clearly states that unions are part of the problem (albeit a case can be made that their constituency is far different than those of the Super PACS) and I added that President Obama will have to deal with Super PACS during the Presidential election also.

As far as women's voting rights, I sure as hell wouldn't tell a woman that she doesn't matter or couldn't vote. I don't understand the minority/racial argument either, but oh well, to each his own I guess...

[anaximander]

My response was largely to the inference
that recent amendments were beneficial
to the people vs 'the rich'.

To whit I explained very simply what and why.

I'll tell any nonbusiness owning- nonproperty holding-
nonclerical- nonacademic- no man that they have
no right to vote. Their degree of investment
and risk exposure with society is nonexistent.

Why should those who don't contribute to
the treasury be allowed to pilfer it at their whim?
Why should those with no investment
in the continued primacy of our society
be allowed to benefit from it as they
attack it?

Since some women are business owners
and significant property holders it is just
that they be able to vote to better support
their individual properties and holdings.

Money doesn't always equal votes. It helps a lot.
But a confident candidate following a proven
program can often overcome a dithering incumbent.

You have issues with funding
Me too.
Clinton accepting money from the PLA for his reelection.
Sheik Hussein was accepting money from palestinian
for his election- and reelection as well.

[1NEMESIS]

Originally Posted by anaximander

My response was largely to the inference
that recent amendments were beneficial
to the people vs 'the rich'.

To whit I explained very simply what and why.

I'll tell any nonbusiness owning- nonproperty holding-
nonclerical- nonacademic- no man that they have
no right to vote. Their degree of investment
and risk exposure with society is nonexistent.

Why should those who don't contribute to
the treasury be allowed to pilfer it at their whim?
Why should those with no investment
in the continued primacy of our society
be allowed to benefit from it as they
attack it?

Since some women are business owners
and significant property holders it is just
that they be able to vote to better support
their individual properties and holdings.

Money doesn't always equal votes. It helps a lot.
But a confident candidate following a proven
program can often overcome a dithering incumbent.

You have issues with funding
Me too.
Clinton accepting money from the PLA for his reelection.
Sheik Hussein was accepting money from palestinian
for his election- and reelection as well.

"My response was largely to the inference
that recent amendments were beneficial
to the people vs 'the rich'."

Can you tell me what amendments those were specifically and elaborate?

[anaximander]

No, I already did. Try and keep up.

Posit a relevant boggle.

[1NEMESIS]

Originally Posted by anaximander

No, I already did. Try and keep up.

Posit a relevant boggle.

Lol! I can't do that, first I don't recognize nativist.

Second, I don't generally have discussions with someone that is worried about being neutered

"Giving women the vote~ ehh that did open the venue
of looting the treasury ....for the children."

This is an amazingly regressive and chauvinistic statement. You think that a women's right to vote is somehow linked to looting the treasury?!?

Third, your comments are intellectually incoherent and full of extremist zealotry and dogma and I won't entertain anymore contact with you.