Show of HandsShow of Hands

Mattwall1 October 25th, 2014 12:20am

Just as many facets of the Roman Republican system, such as the Century Assembly, appeared to give equality although actually giving the elite disproportionate power, so has Citizens United, claiming equal speech access, given the elite more power.

8 Liked

Comments: Add Comment

ThePhlegm The Lone Star State
10/25/14 12:10 pm

It gave a more level "playing field". Was it fair that only unions could give 100's of millions of dollars to pretty much only democrat politicians? I sure democrats think so, but it was not. Either stop both, or stop neither.

Mattwall1
10/26/14 11:00 am

I'm actually not a fan of that either. Same corrupting influence just from a difference direction

kermie gaytopia
10/24/14 8:42 pm

You weren't supposed to be clever enough to figure that out. Go back to watching TV!

Reply
Mattwall1
10/24/14 8:54 pm

But I prefer Livy to TV

kermie gaytopia
10/24/14 8:57 pm

Usually I can figure out your typos but I'm stumped here. Unless you have a new girlfriend I don't know about.

Hey how did you bday go and that whole thing at the mall?

Mattwall1
10/24/14 9:08 pm

So that wasn't a typo,,,

kermie gaytopia
10/24/14 11:42 pm

Ha! Sorry for assuming.

Did you follow my bday advice?

Mattwall1
11/12/14 7:46 am

I did. Of course their response was to harass me with prank pizza orders and show up at my work

kermie gaytopia
11/12/14 9:18 am

Time for a restraining order?

Mattwall1
11/12/14 9:20 am

Maybe, I'll wait and see before I go quite that far

Mattwall1
10/24/14 7:38 pm

To be fair, I can't say I'm shocked

rbrown Kansas
10/24/14 7:46 pm

Could you explain how you see it!

skinner Jersey City
10/25/14 5:38 am

I feel that the decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commision was correct. It is a violation of free speech rights to prevent corporations and unions from donating funds towards creating political advertisements.

rons WOKE is sick
10/25/14 5:55 am

It really pissed off the Unions when they had a monopoly on big political funding.

rbrown Kansas
10/25/14 6:21 am

In spite of the fact that more money equals more speech giving the rich more power to choose the direction our county goes?

skinner Jersey City
10/25/14 6:44 am

The rich have always had more power than the other classes. That was the case before and after Citizens United, but ultimately it's still one citizen one vote. Corporations and unions can try to influence elections by contributing advertisements in

skinner Jersey City
10/25/14 6:48 am

favor of or against a given candidate or issue, but in the end their power is limited to influence. However prudent you may consider it forbidding these entities from contributing towards advertisements would have been illogical for the SCOTUS based

skinner Jersey City
10/25/14 6:49 am

on stare decisis and our understanding of the first amendment.

Mattwall1
10/25/14 7:21 am

So if I understand, you're in favor of letting civil rights being determined by class?

skinner Jersey City
10/25/14 8:07 am

Matt: it seems you don't understand, because I haven't the slightest comprehension how you reached that conclusion from what I just stated.

Mattwall1
10/25/14 8:09 am

The combination of citizens united and the fact that wealth already determines power seemed to be indicating that whether or not it was intended.

rons WOKE is sick
10/25/14 8:16 am

Could you tell me why Obama opted out of the government campaign funding in 08?

Mattwall1
10/25/14 8:18 am

Ron: we both know why. Regardless of whether Obama cared about the effects of unlimited campaign funding or not, we both know that you can't run for office and have a legitimate shot using the public funding. I think it's unfortunate. I'm not stupid

Mattwall1
10/25/14 8:19 am

Enough to not say he may just not care, and if that is the case I'd heartily disagree. Also, skinner, Starr decisis would explain the reason why the court would rule as it did (even if I disagree with the decision I can see both sides). That doesn't

Mattwall1
10/25/14 8:21 am

Change whether or not there's an equivalency between current us politics especially when it comes to campaign funding and the ability to exercise legal and civil rights (let alone power) and the roman republic, particularly in regards to the century

Mattwall1
10/25/14 8:21 am

Assembly. How the decision was made, does not effect what it parallels.

rons WOKE is sick
10/25/14 8:29 am

Matt! Don't forget to cast your vote on election day! Time to solder some pipes to fix a leak! Had a fun day!

Mattwall1
10/25/14 8:30 am

Trust me Ron, I am planning on voting

rons WOKE is sick
10/25/14 8:31 am

You a good man and a good citizen. I mean that.

skinner Jersey City
10/25/14 9:08 am

Matt: Well I would vehemently disagree with that speculation. All people are equal under our campaign laws as everyone can exercise their right to advertising their political beliefs. The wealthy may have more funds available to display their

skinner Jersey City
10/25/14 9:09 am

opinions, but everyone has an equal opportunity to present their politicsl beliefs. That's not different civil rights, that's the realization of our potential for civil liberties.

Mattwall1
10/25/14 9:37 am

I'm not saying there are different civil rights. I'm saying there's different amount if access and opportunity for it how due to where current constitutional principle stands. Yes there's one man per vote and $1=$1, but that's no different than 1 man

Mattwall1
10/25/14 9:38 am

One vote, one century one vote, but keep on mind that all those centuries favor us patricians you little plebs, but hey you have equality in paper. It could be worse-you could be a Gaul after all

fredd TrumpLand
10/24/14 5:33 pm

More like equal speech per dollar.

Reply
fredd TrumpLand
10/24/14 5:34 pm

Than per person (including corporations as people of course...)

Mattwall1
11/12/14 7:48 am

Yes, on paper, things look equal. In reality, it isn't not from a real perspective, nor, at least IMHO, a constitutional one.

Arananthi Literal Ninja
10/24/14 5:27 pm

I'd love to see the 'reasoning' behind disagreeing with this claim.

Reply
Joshua77 Jesus is Lord
10/24/14 5:30 pm

The founding fathers already made the argument, it's called the First Amendment.

kermie gaytopia
10/24/14 8:46 pm

That may be an argument in favor of the ruling (a very weak argument, as money is not speech) but that doesn't mean the ruling doesn't empower the elite. Much of the original Constitution and amendments empowered the elite actually.

kermie gaytopia
10/24/14 8:46 pm

We have been slowly remedying this ever since--no thanks to the Roberts court who is trying to massively undermine that effort.

Joshua77 Jesus is Lord
10/25/14 6:06 am

According to SCOTUS, money is speech. Limits on what people can spend to disseminate their political views are arbitrary and deliberately harmful to our democratic process. Don't forget that the 4 liberal justices voted for banning books (think

Joshua77 Jesus is Lord
10/25/14 6:06 am

Fahrenheit 451.