Thom Hartmann, "Fascism Coming to a Court Near You"

Thom Hartmann did a fantastic job with this essay. If you were not scared to begin with, you will be after reading the following article. There will be a lot of pushing back if we want the U.S.A. to be a respected leader in this world.

link: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/thom-hartmann/fascism-coming-to-a-court_b_226256.html

<snip>

Citizens United, the right-wing group, sued the Supreme Court, with right-wing hit man and former Reagan solicitor general Ted Olson as their lead lawyer.

This new case, Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, presents the best opportunity for the Roberts Court to use its five vote majority to totally re-write the face of politics in America, rolling us back to the pre-1907 era of the Robber Barons.

As Jeffrey Toobin wrote in The New Yorker ("No More Mr. Nice Guy"): "In every major case since he became the nation's seventeenth Chief Justice, Roberts has sided with the prosecution over the defendant, the state over the condemned, the executive branch over the legislative, and the corporate defendant over the individual plaintiff. Even more than Scalia, who has embodied judicial conservatism during a generation of service on the Supreme Court, Roberts has served the interests, and reflected the values, of the contemporary Republican Party."

And the only way the modern Republican Party can recover their power over the next decade is to immediately clear away all impediments to unrestrained corporate participation in electoral politics. If a corporation likes a politician, they can make sure he or she is elected every time; if they become upset with a politician, they can carpet-bomb her district with a few million dollars worth of ads and politically destroy her.

And it looks like that's exactly what the Roberts Court is planning. In the Citizens United case, they asked for it to be re-argued in September of this year, going all the way back to the 1980s and re-examining the rationales for Congress to have any power to regulate corporate "free speech."

<end of snip>

It all comes down to this, what is more important to this society? Our fellow human being or the all mighty dollar!

all over themselves trying not to be "obstructionists".

Thank you Harry Reid, Joe Biden, et al.

Is there never a fight that is worth standing for til the bitter end for a Democratic Senator? Everything about Roberts was there for all to see and the Democrats just rolled over. Disgusting.

Recommend.

How many on the Left agree with Roberts on some of those issues and which ones?

The real problem is, how far is the Supreme Court (and other courts for that fact) out of line to what society needs to exist and prosper. It would be a lie to say that people cannot exist under repression, but as a whole, people do better when everyone has a chance to succeed.

Protected by the First Amendment?

They also say money is "free speech" and therefore cannot be regulated in election campaigns.

It's pretty remarkable that the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court is in lockstep with the more radical elements of a political party that could collapse and go the way of the Whigs any day now.

<snip>

Lawyers for the American Civil Liberties Union of Colorado (ACLU) filed suit against the City of Craig in Moffat County District Court late Monday afternoon, asking the court to declare that a provision of the Craig City Charter violates the First Amendment and cannot be enforced. The Charter forbids candidates for city posts to spend more than $500 on their campaigns. The ACLU filed the legal action on behalf of Francisco Reina, who ran unsuccessfully for Craig City Council in April, 2009. Reina faces a criminal charge of violating the spending limit and is set to appear in Craig Municipal Court on Wednesday morning June 17.

"The First Amendment right of free expression protects the right of candidates for public office to spend their own money to promote their views and inform the public about their candidacy," said Ed Ramey, an ACLU Cooperating Attorney who filed the legal challenge.

Reina spent approximately $1500 of his own money on his unsuccessful campaign. City Attorney Kenneth Wohl initially said he did not believe that a prosecution was warranted. The City Council, however, voted 6-0 May 26 to "recommend" that Reina be prosecuted, and he was promptly served with a summons. Violation of the city charter is a misdemeanor carrying a potential punishment of a fine up to $1000 and up to 180 days in jail.

<end of snip>

link: http://www.aclu.org/freespeech/cfr/39901prs20090616.html


<snip>

Do not get me wrong. The ACLU is among those who believe that the system of electing candidates to federal office badly needs repair. And we will continue to advocate reform of the current system - such as our longstanding support for full public financing - but in doing so we will stress fidelity to the principles protected by the First Amendment with the goal of expanding, not limiting, political speech.

The proposals currently being considered by Congress do not do that. They are instead based once again on the failed approach of limits, limits and more limits - limits on candidates, limits on political parties, limits on independent political groups and, of course, limits on issue advocacy.

This bill represents a double-barreled attack on political freedom in America.

<end of snip>

link: http://www.aclu.org/freespeech/cfr/11403prs20010301.html


and a list of other free speech concerns from the ACLU

link: http://www.aclu.org/freespeech/cfr/index.html

Always was, always will be. Thus the difference between "bribes" and lawful "support."

Once you open up "free speech" to interpretations other than SPEECH it would seem you could define just about anything as "free speech" and claim it is protected by the First Amendment. Murder? "I was just freely expressing myself, your Honor, so the Constitution protects me." Heaven only knows where that kind of nonsense would end.

You can find out what a clean elections law means by watching this documentary narrated by Bill Moyers. It's just a 14 minute video.

http://www.caclean.org/materials/watch.php

:fistbump:

Good luck.
:eyes:

the Democratic Party will simply not allow the GOP to die.

I would think after the last 8+ years it would become obvious at any rate, the democrats have gone to great lengths to prevent the demise of the GOP in spite of the republiks best efforts to kill themselves.

The DNC and GOP have gone to great lengths to keep our system a two party system. Having said that, it may take time to dig ourselves out of this rut. Keeping ourselves informed and politically active by speaking/writing to our representatives and informing others is very important. Eventually, the populace will wear down the system if these two parties do not do it to themselves first.

:kick:

Thank you for posting this!

Kick but, too late for a rec.