Comments on: Roberts Court: Easier to donate, harder to vote http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2014/04/04/roberts-court-easier-to-donate-harder-to-vote/ Thu, 21 Jul 2016 07:57:19 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.5 By: jenni123 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2014/04/04/roberts-court-easier-to-donate-harder-to-vote/#comment-85364 Sun, 06 Apr 2014 01:15:32 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=29991#comment-85364 So put on your big boy pants and vote. You don’t need to vote based on who spends more money; you can form your opinions like a real person.

]]>
By: brotherkenny4 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2014/04/04/roberts-court-easier-to-donate-harder-to-vote/#comment-85342 Fri, 04 Apr 2014 20:46:50 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=29991#comment-85342 libertas: the voter turn out was exceptional because of the blatant attempts to limit access which resulted in great anger. This ruling does the same. These actions are too obvious even for the lethargic american citizen. I believe the old right wing nuts knew that the american voter was best left asleep, but this new generation is many generation removed from any actual real life experience and has assumed it’s own rhetoric is correct. I suspect this move was meant to demotivate for the mid-term, but it will likely do the opposite. Sanity-Monger posits that the court is either stupid or evil. I would say their action is evil, but that’s because they are stupid. Anyway, good luck to you Mr. second level minion and hopefully you don’t feel too lonely as the numbers of people on the planet that could possibly consider what you say as legitimate is reduced naturally by their age induce disappearance.

]]>
By: Sanity-Monger http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2014/04/04/roberts-court-easier-to-donate-harder-to-vote/#comment-85338 Fri, 04 Apr 2014 16:42:27 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=29991#comment-85338 These conservative supremes are either stupid or evil. They SAY that all this money in the system doesn’t even give the appearance of corruption. If they believe this, then they are stupid and/or deluded to the point where they have no business holding their office. If, as I suspect, they merely recognize that a highly cynical public serves the interests of their cronies — those elite few who should “count” in our society — then they are evil. In any case, while we may be cynical, we have not been fooled. I’d love to see one of them utter that statement about no appearance of corruption with a straight face.

Was listening to Diane Rehm the other day, and one of the conservative guests told the sad tale of McCutcheon (the plantiff) and how he is such a super-patriot that he likes to donate $1776 to his political candidates. But with contribution limits, he could only donate this amount to 16 candidates. Oh how sad!! He can only buy the favors of 16 public servants. Who should he pick? Apparently, there’s just no way around this dilemma without tossing a law that has helped keep the oligarchs at bay for 40 years. (Mr. McCutcheon, how about giving $17.76 to 1600 candidates?)

The oligarchs may have won, but we plain folk at least still have eyes to see and brains to discern what’s really going on. If only the same could be said of our supreme court justices.

]]>
By: COindependent http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2014/04/04/roberts-court-easier-to-donate-harder-to-vote/#comment-85337 Fri, 04 Apr 2014 15:42:06 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=29991#comment-85337 @Blue You will also note that I have always promoted term limits to reduce the impact of money and the consolidation of power within the Beltway. Should we not impose term limits at all levels of government, that will be the legacy your children and grandchildren rightfully should criticize our generation.

At least in Colorado, we have imposed term limits at the state level. The results have been extremely positive. The day of the professional politician within our state government is over. They just fade into the sunset.

]]>
By: libertas http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2014/04/04/roberts-court-easier-to-donate-harder-to-vote/#comment-85336 Fri, 04 Apr 2014 15:28:48 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=29991#comment-85336 The recent voter restrictions have simply been common sense. Unless you are a liberal that is.

After new voter ID laws that liberals vehemently proclaimed would prevent voters from voting we had the largest voter turnout in about 10 year. And it was even stronger among minorities who were supposed to be hindered from voting.

Articles like these make for good political rhetoric but I have yet to see any basis in factual results.

]]>
By: tatman http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2014/04/04/roberts-court-easier-to-donate-harder-to-vote/#comment-85335 Fri, 04 Apr 2014 15:15:17 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=29991#comment-85335 what’s interesting here is the near completion of the judicial activism plan launched during the w. bush administration. how quickly americans forget the scandals that brought down heather rep. wilson and sen. pete domenici in new mexico, upon exposure of their participation in firing democratic-appointed judges on the federal bench and replacing them with conservative ideologues. back in 2007-2008, this was news — how elected officials in the republican party were replacing liberal judges with those sympathetic to the conservative mission — pro-business, anti-consumer, anti-regulation and social conservatism — all the while painting progressive judges as “activist”.

in reality, these judges which replaced progressive leaning justices on a state-by-state and federal basis, were the tru activists — working in tandem with the chamber of commerce and the republican platform to reshape and forever alter the federal judiciary to one which rubber stamps the conservative agenda. we are seeing this all the way up to SCOTUS, with the bush appointees dominating the court and effectively dismantling campaign corruption legislation, and enacting a pro-corporate activism which has effectively eviscerated the america’s political system, from the state to federal levels (even as I write this, states across america are either abandoning state legislation limiting campaign contributions or challenging such restrictions in court — or both).

with the gutting of the voting rights act, the roberts court has given a blank check to the continued use of voter intimidation, gerrymandering and redistricting in order to assist the republican party with voter suppression. with citizens united and the mccutcheon ruling, they have canceled out the average american’s vote in favor of those with UNLIMITED cash to buy elections.

if america thought watergate was bad, we’ve just seen the complete dismantling of any shred of integrity, honesty and constitutional protections of our political system. the mega-elite, many of whom share dual citizenships with other nations, have unprecedented power over our elected officials.

WHO DO YOU REALLY THINK YOUR CONGRESSMAN WILL LISTEN TO? YOU? WITH YOUR MEASLY INDIVIDUAL CONTRIBUTION? OR A CORPORATION NOW ABLE TO DONATE TENS OF MILLIONS — OR HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS (AS IN THE CASE OF THE KOCH BROTHERS) TO INFLUENCE ELECTIONS?

democracy in america died this week, and the average american has seen their access to and legitimacy of the voting/political system destroyed. we are slaves. and our masters now own us all the way from the state legislatures to the office of the president and the supreme court.

congratulations, america. you are bought, sold, packaged and delivered to those who will do everything in their power to protect, secure and increase their wealth.

absolute power corrupts absolutely. and we now have the most corrupt political system in the western world.

]]>
By: BlueInBama http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2014/04/04/roberts-court-easier-to-donate-harder-to-vote/#comment-85334 Fri, 04 Apr 2014 15:08:56 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=29991#comment-85334 COindependent likes to comfort himself by erecting straw man arguments and then knocking them down in rapid succession, all the while his big-moneyed overlords buy the country out from under him as he unsuspectingly looks in the other direction for a fresh pile of straw. One day our children will look upon our generation in utter amazement as they come to terms with the reality that we heartily ushered in a return of the gilded age through our wanton ignorance and small-minded fears.

]]>
By: COindependent http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2014/04/04/roberts-court-easier-to-donate-harder-to-vote/#comment-85333 Fri, 04 Apr 2014 14:38:56 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=29991#comment-85333 Same liberal tripe. There are NOT ANY restrictions on an individuals right to vote. One only has to look at the past national elections to see that.

The community activists ensured their constituency voted–even driving them to the polling stations. It’s only when the liberals do not get what they want do they complain of voter disenfranchisement.

I’ll tell you what disenfranchisement is…it’s when a career politician continues to loot the taxpayer for their personal gain by selling their vote to the special interests. It’s when a career politician diminishes my rights, protected under the Constitution, because they believe I am incapable of making my own decisions. It’s when a career politician mandates that I sacrifice my personal beliefs so that some secular agenda can be imposed. It’s when a career politician continues to fund an inferior school in order to protect teachers unions, while they send their children to private school. ad infinitum….

]]>
By: Oldbizeditor http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2014/04/04/roberts-court-easier-to-donate-harder-to-vote/#comment-85332 Fri, 04 Apr 2014 14:11:38 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=29991#comment-85332 Excellent juxtaposition of the court majority’s skewed approach to electoral democracy. One must wonder what Judge Roberts gets from his remarkably open efforts to kiss up to the wealthy. Does he vicariously join their gilded lives, or is it something more concrete?

]]>