Results 1 to 5 of 5
  1. #1
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,536
    I'm pretty sure the decision will be 5 extremist-anti-democratic-anti-human-American Repug assholes to 4 in favor on unlimited spending to buy politicians

    =================
    Why Limit Political Donations?

    October 6, 2013


    This week, the Supreme Court is scheduled to hear arguments in McCutcheon v. the Federal Election Commission, a case that challenges limits on individual contributions made directly to political candidates. It would expand on the 2010 Citizens United ruling that allows unlimited spending by corporations.
    Instead of this piecemeal approach, would it make more sense to just get rid of all limits on political spending, as Senator Mitch McConnell has suggested?


    http://mobile.nytimes.com/roomfordeb...WT.z_mob_rel=1



  2. #2
    Veteran scott's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Post Count
    20,555
    I'd be perfectly fine with getting rid of the limits, so long as we eliminated anonymous contributions and if you give over a certain amount or were responsible for over a certain % of the PAC's budget, then your name (or the company's name) has to go on the Political Ad as well.

  3. #3
    dangerous floater Winehole23's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Post Count
    113,787

  4. #4
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,536
    Kennedy with the majority decision in C-U! what a pile of acrobatically twisted bull .

    A safe bet would be SCROTUS removing all limits on campaign contributions, aka buying into qui pro quo corruption.

  5. #5
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,536
    Kennedy with the majority decision in C-U! what a pile of acrobatically twisted bull .

    A safe bet would be SCROTUS removing all limits on campaign contributions, aka buying into qui pro quo corruption.
    Klown Kennedy:

    "With the advent of the Internet, prompt disclosure of
    expenditures can provide shareholders and citizens with
    the information needed to hold corporations and elected
    officials accountable for their positions and supporters.

    Shareholders can determine whether their corporation's
    political speech advances the corporation's interest in
    making profits, and citizens can see whether elected officials are 'in the pocket' of so-called moneyed interests."

    Holy


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •