Friday, January 22, 2010

Speech is money

"The ads will get more honest," said Keating, director of the Club for Growth, (@#$@) a group supports candidates who call for lower taxes and smaller government. "Instead of having all this nonsense about 'Call him,' they'll tell you what to do: Go vote."

But honest ads were only a collateral issue on the court's agenda. The objective of the five-justice majority was to free up the speech rights of corporations, overturning statutes and previous court rulings dating back as far as 1947. Corporations, legally considered persons under a Supreme Court cases from the 19th Century, have more limited First Amendment rights than what are known as "natural persons." National Potlach Radiation

Wouldn't an inquiry into the history and nuance and logic of "speech rights" be more relevant than asshat speculation of possible effects?

Except of course sensible speculations:

I congratulate Wealth Bondage on their Supreme Court Victory. Democracy is Game over, I guess. But maybe the polictical ads will be of higher quality now that they can be financed to infinity. I don't mind being ruled by propagandists, but I do prefer high production values, and star power. Gifthub

NPR's Ken Rudin cites Chris Good, blogging at The Atlantic:

...the accounting firewall is gone, and Wal-Mart or the Service Employees International Union, for instance, can spend their corporate money directly on candidates.
Again, the shiftless refusal to examine the basic components irks. Prompting this National Potlach contribution from me:
What is "corporate money"? The whole fictional realm of corporate citizenship, personhood deserving of constitutional protection and rights, etc. needs insight, critique, common sense. Who owns corporate money anyway? The shareholders? If so, why would a shareholder wish to bestow his money on a politician unless s/he believes the politician will work to advance the corporate interests? And what are those interests other than to make money? Therefore what we are talking about, it seems, is the legitimization of a new kind of investment - buy a politician and see your ROI skyrocket. Beats the pants off sub-primes and derivatives.

Labels: , ,


Post a Comment

<< Home