Understanding Liberal Rage Over Citizens United
by Brian GarstOn paper the Citizens United case has all the makings of a solid liberal issue. First Amendment protections, considered sacrosanct by the left when a reporter is leaking classified information, are strengthened for those speaking truth to power. Both the ACLU and AFL-CIO support the decision. So why are prominent liberals speaking out so vehemently against it?
It would be easy to chalk up liberal outrage to a general hatred for all things corporate. But is that enough to overcome what otherwise seems like a tailor-made liberal issue? After all, the ACLU said “[the prohibition on corporate speech] is facially unconstitutional under the First Amendment because it permits the suppression of core political speech.” Moreover, the corporate gains, which liberals might feel benefit the right, are offset by those of the unions and other liberal issue groups that benefit from the ruling just the same. The net political impact is thus neutral, suggesting that their opposition isn’t political in nature. Neither is it based on the merits. Rather, it is philosophical.
Consider the following reactions to the decision from the left. The New York Times editorialized the decision as a “blow to democracy,” and a “disastrous 5-to-4 ruling” that “has thrust politics back to the robber-baron era of the 19th century.” Talk about overwrought.
President Obama decried the “stampede of special interest money” that will somehow “[undermine] the influence of average Americans.” Senator Patrick Leahy warned that the decision would “change the course of our democracy.” And the ever-contemptible Rep. Alan Grayson must have been hyperventilating when he declared that “this is the worst Supreme Court decision since the Dred Scott case. It leads us all down the road to serfdom.”
As if these politicians aren’t bad enough, the liberal blogosphere is even worse, as frantic left-wing bloggers and their readers have been busy declaring an end to democracy as we know it ever since the ruling came down.
The apocalyptic – and not to mention apoplectic – nature of their criticism suggests an answer as to why the decision irks them so. Liberals think you are all idiots. American voters are simply too stupid to filter so much information and then reach the right decision. And as they well know, the right decision is unquestionably to adopt the liberal position. They, as the learned among us, know best and so ought to be the only ones allowed to tell you what you should think and why you should think it. That way you don’t get confused by all those other pesky views and opinions. One wonders how we ever survived as a nation before the great heroes John McCain and Russ Feingold came along to save us from ourselves.
At the heart of the liberal philosophy of government is a belief that people are too stupid to fend for themselves, manage their own affairs or vote for the right candidates. Democracy itself will be destroyed because of a few extra ads targeting voters before elections? Voters, it seems, just aren’t sophisticated enough to handle that much information.
Unfortunately for the left, the Constitution recognizes rights that all citizens have, regardless of how intelligent the editorial board of the New York Times thinks a person from Kansas really is. It turns out that “make no law” really means that “Congress shall make no law,” even if that law would advance the liberal agenda.
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
227 Comments
God Bless America to all you Progressives.
Corporations can not be a legal person because a legal person can not be owned due to the 13th Amendment. Oooops. Looks like the Supreme Court (corporate whores they are) was just outwitted by TheFonz.
Red herring.
The First Amendment read: "Congress shall make no law … abridging the freedom of speech."
What part of coming together to form a coalition of people, whether it by via coporation or non-profit, invalidates this clearly worded and easily understood restriction on what government can do?
Visit Big Journalism and watch the Cato institute video imbedded in a similar story. Then review President Obama's reaction to yesterdays SC ruling. Obamas reaction makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.
The Supreme Courts Citizens United decision is sending liberals into wretching rabid seizures of fear, Fear that the left is losing what minimal control of public discourse their mouthpeice tools in the mainstream media still weild. The deafening squeals of liberals remind one of stuck hogs that soon will be roast rather thanthe left's favorite food political pork.
Now that business can again directly address their concerns to the American electorate the liberal pols likely will see a more than substantial decline in the extortion money they can quietly and stealthily extract from business. Liberals squealing is likely to be louder in the future as their money troughs are less filled with corporate cash seeking to buy them off now that the corporations can carry their message directly to the voters.
Yes, 'Non-Profits' *cough* like, ACORN, are 'legal people' though.
My Father is a sole proprietor. He's incorporated. He's a person. Just like George Soros, except with far less money, and much more morality.
It will warm my heart if McCain and Feingold get their comeuppances come election day. Bush, I guess, already has his; he won't be enshrined at Mt. Rushmore.
I suppose a non-profit corporation would just be to obvious? Non-profit corporations are eligible to receive private and public grants, and are able to apply for tax-exempt status. A non-profit corporation can also solicit tax-deductible donations. Nice try Henry…
You Progressives you keep on thinking we're stupid.That's good because we're going to stupid our way right into the White House.
[...] in an uproar over the recent Supreme Court decision that struck down parts of McCain-Feingold. My post on Big Government tells you why: On paper the Citizens United case has all the makings of a solid [...]
What part of "Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction." are you trying to squeeze your zits through?
….At the heart of the liberal philosophy of government is a belief that people are too stupid to fend for themselves, manage their own affairs or vote for the right candidates. Democracy itself will be destroyed because of a few extra ads targeting voters before elections? Voters, it seems, just aren’t sophisticated enough to handle that much information….
Absolutely the core of the problem with the left and really, the political elites. Bring on the Tea Party Movement! We are sick and tired of being treated like we're too stupid to think for ourselves.
I dropped Progressive Insurance years ago due to the political leanings of the ownership. Same thing for AARP, and several other companys or institutions. TV ads or bulk mailings notwithstanding, I, as a thinking considerate individual am able to process different sources of infermation and draw a conclusion. I do not need government regulations to filter those sources to "help" me form my decisions. Part of my decisions will be based on where funding for a cause or candidate originates.
Corporations are natural persons?
When they merge are they married? and if so are they same sex?
When they have more than one merger, are they committing polygamy?
When they put another business out of business, should they be tried for murder?
When a company buys another, should that not be called slavery?
When there is a hostile take over, should that not be called piracy?
We must all remember that Progressive and Liberal (and most of the time Democrat, as well) means socialist—socialist of the fascist type or the communist type. They want to destroy the Constitution and America. Sadly, we can't just kill them off, though I wish we could. Instead, we have to continue fighting them every day, using the tactics good people use, as opposed to the Nazi and Communists tactics they employ.
Mcain has Palin campaigning for him, very disappointing.
The very fact people do this nonsense like becoming incorporated should indicate the system is a farce. It doesn't make sense. SO YOU ARE ADMITTING that a natural person has fewer rights than a "corporate" entity – thus proving the difference. You have shot your side in the foot.
can you say that agin
lol
The coup is now complete, thanks Supreme court!!!
I suspect this includes churches now. Keith is ofcourse a big mouth paid for by GE NBC. Should he work free or shut up?
nice: cut and paste job…
The right should be very upset, they have been demanding their country be taken back, and now thanks to the Supreme court they may have lost it forever!!
The libs have been declaring the "end of Democracy" since 1960, at least.
"The man" has always been part of the paranoia.
You don't choose to change unless there is some benefit.
Count me in- I'm with Stupid!
He is.
Even the thought of killing people for their political beliefs is abhorrent. Such ugly things to say about other Americans.
ANSWER THE QUESTION ASSHAT! How do you "shoot your side in the foot"?
especially since jd hayworth is now going to run against mccain
Keith Olberman should be the Official Poster Boy, for Stupid.
Have you ever noticed how progressives like to send their minions out to work in the educational system…the dumbing down of America. They want us to be surrounded by their way of thinking. Now that we get the opportunity to hear the political opinions of successful businesses, they are afraid.
I don't think its such a bad idea to hear the political opinions of Ford Motor Company. We constantly hear the political opinions of special interest groups who rely on government subsistence for their survival. Now, maybe we can hear from successful companies. Perhaps they will even tell us what they need the Government to do to make 'Made In the USA' financially viable again.
If you want to get from point A to point B, then taking the bus provides you a benefit. Does that mean bus riders have more rights than everyone else?
Your logic is terrible.
Easy with the hate speech.
Geez, you have little brainpower. I proved there was a benefit to being incorporated, otherwise why do it? That benefit is increased rights and lowered accountability (they usually just list the LATTER and they usually call it lowering risk, but it is the same thing.)
If you think about this it is actually funny. Doesn't GE already own MSNBC now? So in reality GE can own a media company that is radical and can promote their own ideas that benefit themselves like going green and all that technology. GE is the one who will get rich by promoting green Tech. But if another Corporation puts money into advertising it's somehow wrong?? I think the Liberal media, which is owned many times by radicals, are just trying to own it all for themselves. That's how we ended up with the Socialist Clown for President. HaHAHa…
It is disgusting isn't it? I can't believe she is doing that after McCain and his people pretty much threw her under the bust after the election.
Thank you! Inquisitive people have to know…indeed, how do you shoot your side in the foot? It makes me giggle just to type it… All footing aside- The Fonz just isn't as cool as he used to be.
Benefits and rights are not the same thing. Or course there is a benefit to being incorporated if your goal is to do something which a corporation helps doing, especially when the law requires it. That has nothing to do with rights. The word rights has a specific meaning, which you clearly do not understand.
umm.. Fonz….. cooperations are made up of PEOPLE who are acting for some defined common goal, (economic, political, or religious, or charitable, and i believe Americans do have the right to peaceably assemble in any numbhayer of cooperate entity's to pursue our goals… furthermore peaceful Assembly's of people (including lawfully cooperations) have the right to regress the government for grievances (that is act in the full spectrum of political speech, including issues advocacy ads. (PS, i am a cooperation, as i hold the license to a sole proprietorship) and as a kite builder, and seller, i stand on my Right to run ads at any time against any anti-kite policy, or politician
Fonz, do you know what brought this issue before the Cort? essentially it was the FEC declaring advertisement for a documentary on Hillary Clinton illegal, and censoring the add campaign. the government attorney argued in front of the court that they had the authority to BAN ANY MEDIA that mentioned any candidate for office at least once 60 days before an election, (thats print, Internet, TV, or any new technology that comes out) this one was a no brainier, what worries me is that 4 justices thought the government could censer political speech on the basis of the persons status as a member of a corporation.
on the dangers of corperate mony in politics?…. and acorns mony is Good ?
If she really does she will loose her fans quicker than obama.
The entire argument regarding whether a corporation has all the rights of a person is misguided and besides the point. I blame it on the utter lack of Constitutional education given to public school students in our country.
The Constitution is not primarily a delineator or guarantor of specific rights of citizens. It is, rather a document that establishes comprehensive limitations on the power of government. The focus of the document is never on "what rights do people have," the focus is, instead on "what are the defined and limited powers of government."
Note the first amendment. By its clear wording "Congress shall make no law….." the document makes moot the point of who shall benefit from this limitation, because the limitation is on Congress, not the people. It doesn't matter who or what is engaging in the free speech, the salient part, emphasized by the wording, is that Congress shall make no law that abridges that freedom. We don't have to spend a lot of time agonizing over the entity that is conducting the speech — we can stop once we acknowledge that Congress isn't allowed to abridge it.
Furthermore, because "religion" and "the press" and "the people peacably to assemble" are generally group activities, it is implicit in the amendment that Congresses limitations extend to group activities as well as individual activities.
Much, much harm has been done to our Constitution by people who say things like "There's no right to privacy in the Constitution," or "The Constitution doesn't give people the right to _____" — as the ninth amendment makes explicit and as is implied in the language of the entire document "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."
In other words, the operating principle of the Constitution is that people have ALL rights except in those limited areas where the government is specifically empowered by the Constitution to act.
The first question you should ask when you see a new law made is not "does this violate a right guaranteed in the Constitution" but "Does the Constitution anywhere empower the government to act in this matter."
Over and over again, you will find the answer is "No."
The left and Progressives have been taunting BIG oil,Pharma, and Insurance, like a little boy taunts a Dog on a leash, Oops, the SCOTUS just unleashed the Dog! Watch'em run!
The blatant hypocrasy of the libs on the SCOTUS decision is truly amazing. What, if not a corporation are the television networks? Do they abstain from politically charged speech? And what of the UNIONS who direct the forced dues of their slaves to political parties their rank and file disagree with (MASS.)
Like others on this thread I have relished in the angst of the libs since Tuesday. Their whole paradigm is crumbling, from GITMO, to Health Care, to Terror Trails, to Global Warming,,,,, This has been one of the most enjoyable weeks I have experienced in say 9 years. Squeal baby squeal, our vindication is at hand!!!!
hint: jist turn that t-shirt inside out an it will be good fur another coupel days
WHAT A LOAD. YOU TRYING OUT FOR JAY LENOS' SPOT.
hahahahaha
If your goal, like the dhimmicrats and Obambi, is to destroy the Constitution, thenm you don't deserve to live. I, and countless others swore an oath to defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic. The domestic enemies are the left- they just don't have the huevos to admit the truth.
what they need the Government to do to make 'Made In the USA' financially viable again.
Two things:
1. Get the he!! out of the way.
2. Bust the UNIONS
It really is that simple!
I'm all for lifting the restrictions on political ads – that was a Freedom of Speech issue. But only in a "Living Buh-reaaathing Constitution" can political contributions be considered "speech". Giving money to a candidate is not speech, it's "commerce", and Article I, Section 8, Clause of the United States Constitution gives Congress the power to regulate commerce. Anything that drives liberals nuts typically gets thumbs up from me, but as a strict constructionist I can't in all honesty agree with the court's decision.
I whole heartidly agree! AARP sucks and that little Gecco from Geico (Government Employee Insurance Co.). Maybe the government health care insurance mascot could be a "polar Bear". They will need work too with all the global warming stuff going on.
Very Nice Cloudbuster you completely reshaped my perspective on the constitution.
Feingold comeuppance: WI needs a STRONG candidate; he has never been more vulnerable! He CAN be defeated if an articulate candidate takes him on.
I can't believe he gets paid for this, and yes, he should shut up, he makes the rest of the libs look compassionate and smart.
Obama, his administration, and other liberals thought they had the supreme court in their pocket. Now, as it turns out, the SC wants to champion the people and the constitution thus thwarting the thinly veiled communist agenda of the current regime. Taxpayers of America, lets go for a clean sweep in November. Please don't be fooled by any of the politicians that support this government takeover of health care who suddenly have a change of heart. It's nothing more than self preservation. Vote with your mind and heart. Don't let them ruin our great nation.
The libs are absolutely right, our democracy has died, but it happened 12 months ago!!!
So Fonz what do say about the democratic party which lets every left wing organization anything they want only go after anyone that is against their ideas. Acorn should be investigated by the FBI. Also all of obamas czars that had tax problems should also play by the rules as I have to. Then why was the charges dropped against the black panthers voter intimidation case. What about obama signing a presidential order to let unions do not have to report their financials like they are suppose to do by law. I can go on all night with all the democratic illegal activity that is answered by “WE OR I JUST MADE A MISTAKE”. No personally responsibility on the left.
bravo! best explanation i have heard since i was in high school, if you dont teach american government then maybe you should because our children are not receiving this type of clear concise teachings on the constitution.
Her treatment isn't even the pertinent reason. MuckCain is a Rino, his wife and daughter just came out publicly
in support of pro-choice and he's ineffective. His campaign bill was just found unconstitutional and he's soft on illegal immigration. What does Sarah really stand for and how do her convictions affect her actions? I have always admired her but don't feel she would make a great president, but felt she could be a strong force for conservative action. My respect in this regard just dropped significantly.
Wouldn't it be nice if our Corporations could make a documentary that described how regulation and Unions were forcing them to send jobs and manufacturing overseas? Wouldn't it be nice if in that documentary they were able to tell who the Unions are paying to get their way? And perhaps a corporate documentary could even shed some light on the Union's history of corruption.
Boy, i sure would like to make a documentary like that…do you think Hollywood will help me? No…they like unions. What about a Government grant? LOL…just kidding- I know, that's like asking the Government to pay for bad publicity.
Now, how is a little person like me supposed to get such a documentary made? Wow, thank you Supreme Court…Maybe I'll see if the former CEO's of the Steel Industry will help me make a documentary describing their ruin and how the Unions played into it, with aid from the Democrats- of course!
Add the CORPORATE broadcasters to the list. Why should they have unfettered political speech while other CORPORATIONS do not? Last time I checked the New York Times was a CORPORATION too, maybe not for much longer though seeing as how another CORPORATION "Air Amerika" bit the big one.
I am sure the "progressives" would like you to forget that their brethren killed tens of millions of people in the 20th century.
Excellent synopsis, cloudbuster
………………….. Hanzo
And that my friends, is why Corporations need a voice.
Hi elfonzo, schooled again? Must suck to be the fonz …………. Hanzo
When they make money, do we tax them?
" Wouldn't it be nice if our ~ (MSMedia) ~ could make a documentary that described how regulation and Unions were forcing them to send jobs and manufacturing overseas? Wouldn't it be nice if in that documentary they were able to tell who the Unions are paying to get their way? And perhaps a corporate documentary could even shed some light on the Union's history of corruption."
MSMedia – hahahahahahahaha
I hate to see that. If she chooses to do that, she needs to lose all credibility she has and she should be shunned by all Conservatives ………………Hanzo
screw being nice to these people.they support a person that has learned how to control populations be intimidation, coercion and outright murder to maintain their power. only a 100,000,000 last century.
best to leave their rotting corpse to history than to give them any forum .
Absolutely! But for now its;
BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA mmmmm…….mmmmm……mmmmm
So, if I take corporation money and buy ads for a candidate, instead of giving it to a candidate. That would be free speech, correct? And that is what this case is really about, not so much unlimited contributions but, corporations being able to buy free speech ads.
You're always telling us what NOT to do. What do you suggest?
Perhaps not quite that simple, I've got a long laundry list of wrongs that need to be addressed, starting with the elimination of some(most) of the Amendments added to the Constitution post 1900 ……………….. Hanzo
when you rest on the laurels of the past remember that if you do not watch out you will be bitten in the arse.
If you look up stupid in the dictionary, there's a picture of Keith?
Thhis is a CATO video that explains the case:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PeGlzEavpTM
The coup is now complete? Care to expound on that inane, obtuse statement? How about backing up your position with FACTS and not egregious hyperbole? ………………. Hanzo
What is there to say about it? What does it even have to do with this topic? Ask a neocon, they are closer to being Democrats than I am.
You mean our republic has died don't you?
I can kinda see the point about being to stupid, after all look who won the last presidential election, but what do i know im just a stupid bodyman.
Not dead, just laid up with a bad fever. We will nurse her back to health but it may be a prolonged illness.
Once again, perhaps in terms you can come to grips with~ Where's the beef??? ……………………. Hanzo
MSMedia-hahahahahahah
That's a good one…can't believe I left them out. They don't do investigative reporting anymore. Of course, they say its because it is simply too expensive and CNN spent their investigative budget on fact checking Saturday Night Live on top of that Foxnews is taking their audience. There should be a Government agency dedicated to making sure that audiences are distributed fairly… Better yet, there aught to be a law requiring Fox to do one sided news programs for those who have a progressive viewpoint. Wait a minute… what, oh good…they are working on that!
Anyway, Wouldn't it be nice….
Free speech?How is government mandated health care [taking away my right to choose], "free speech"? Where is the Supreme Court on that one, Fonz? God help us if another Regressive Libtard jurist gets appointed to SCOTUS.
I tink the fear is that the progressives know that they control the media sources that the casual voter will tape into when making political decisions. If everyone else is supressed, and only the MSM, including their websites, are available to the casual voter, they can always win. The almost apathetic voter, who will only vote for big deal elections when it doesn't interfere with his day, may check the local TV site before he votes and nothing else.
Obama and his Nazi regime killed democracy last January 20th. They've destroyed the American economy and will eventually jail anyone who speaks out against their plans to seize control of all aspects of our lives. Goddamn Obama.
Fonz, is there a competition to see who can get the most 'thumbs down'? I can't imagine any other reason for someone spouting off such nonsense.
Can you then, in all honesty, agree with the elimination of all political campaign donations? So where do you get your definition of campaign DONATIONS equals commerce? You say, on one hand, you're "all for lifting the restrictions on political ads", but yet, incredibly, you want to enforce your own brand of prohibition on a certain segment of society because of some strange definition(doublespeak) of words that you make up out of thin air. How absurd. Constructionist indeed. You need to read the above post by Cloudburst, in which he states(and rightfully so), the Constitution is mainly concerned with pointing out limitations placed upon the Government in regards to what power they wield.Actually read the Constitution, start off with the Bill of Rights and go from there. Check back after you read all of the Amendments to the Constitution……………… Hanzo
Americans?
I sent him the memo but he kept saying: "What's THAT word?"
Watch the video.
http://redhotright.blogspot.com/2010/01/beck-revo...
and
'Got that right, Laura. Where does anyone thing much of this TARP and bailout money going? I haven't received a nickel of it.
GE is a corporation it should be banned from owning TV channels that mention anything political, right??
lol
I find it rather amusing that the lib/progressives continually state "It's the end of Democracy", ha ha. We never have been, and hopefully never will be, a Democracy. Our form of Government was always meant to be a Federal Republic, with all the Checks and Balances, such as the Supreme Court, afforded by this form of governance. On the one hand, lib/progressives scream "democracy, democracy", while continually looking down their sanctimonious noses at the general populace. If they were truly concerned with democracy, why do they strive to take Rights away from our citizenry at every opportunity they get?Our Founding Fathers, in their wisdom, knew that often times democracy can degenerate into mob rule, the general populace being, at times, prone to fits of volatility. This is but one reason we so need the system of checks and balances, which, unfortunately, have been eroded as the Federal Government(especially when under the sway of power hungry progressives) usurps power on a daily basis……………………. Hanzo
Before meeting you, I had no idea there was such a thing as an "unnatural person". I guess we CAN learn something new every day. Maybe you should try that for a while and see if it helps.
Aaaaaay!
I didn't know that he was up for promotion.
Hahahahhaha.. Good one, Randy… Got quite the laugh.. My thanks…
What is commerce? Glad you asked. Commerce is the buying and/or selling of commodities. What is a commodity? A tangible asset. Ok, so when I contribute to a political campaign, what, exactly, am I receiving in return in the form of a tangible asset???Therefore, Congress is LIMITED in their ability to regulate political campaign donations, correct? I don't know about you, but it's very clear to me, the McCain-Feingold "law", in it's premise and entirety, is UNCONSTITUTIONAL. Being a "Constructionist"(perhaps you meant a "Constitutionalsit"), I don't see how you can argue the point, and thank God the SCOTUS has, indeed, made it a moot point………………………… Hanzo
That picture of Olberman is hilarious! It looks like he just sat on satan's codpiece!
Yes of course American Corperations are bad, Left Wing Socialist, International Criminal, Billionaires like George Soros are good.
This decision was big, God it's been a good week.
You must be logged in to post a comment.