Comments on The Supreme Court: Leveler of Playing Fields, or Enforcer of Standards?

Go to A Distant Drum of the Coming RevolutionAdd a commentGo to The Supreme Court: Leveler of Playing Fields, or Enforcer of Standards?

I will admit, Blanche,

that the idea is laudable. But is it worth circumventing or superceding the law of the land in order to realize it? Has he not heard of the amendment process?

As Leroy put it, who decides what is fair? That's why we have laws - to provide a fixed standard, as opposed to the shifting sands of fairness.

posted by WriterofLight on December 6, 2006 at 8:21 PM | link to this | reply

Great Post
You're right on target.  Who gets to decide who the "little guy" is?  Is it the 20,000,000 from the NRA with a million members or the 20,000,000 from George Soros?

posted by LeRoyCoyote on December 6, 2006 at 11:37 AM | link to this | reply

corporations want as little public exposure to their sponsorship
that way they can influence the legislators better.

posted by Xeno-x on December 5, 2006 at 9:54 AM | link to this | reply

Xeno, corporate sponsorship. I like that. That's how I can do it.
When I run for president, I'll wear a nascar uniform with all my sponsors boldly displayed.

posted by SuccessWarrior on December 5, 2006 at 7:17 AM | link to this | reply

and of course onece they've been elected
then all their money turns into more free speech in the form of favors returned in the form of legislation.

i think it's more bought politicians than it is free speech.


posted by Xeno-x on December 5, 2006 at 5:27 AM | link to this | reply

well of course
some people's speech is freer than others'

and sure as hell we want to keep it that way so that more people like our stupid president who is merely a puppet for those whose speech would be abridged would be elected.

yeah give em all the air time -- i mean corporate sponsorship means a fair election.



posted by Xeno-x on December 5, 2006 at 5:25 AM | link to this | reply

WriterofLight, I followed your link and read the Breyer transcript, it

seems a much more complex and nuanced subject than you are portraying here. What Justice Breyer seemed to be saying, to me, was that the little person, the person who does not have $20 million to spend in campaign funds ought to have as much voice in the democratic process as the big contributors, the major players with $20 million.
 

I kind of like that idea. 

posted by Blanche. on December 5, 2006 at 2:08 AM | link to this | reply

I'll tell you what. 20 million still doesn't level it for me. =)

posted by SuccessWarrior on December 4, 2006 at 8:15 PM | link to this | reply