3418
Comments (107)
sorted by:
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
3
Wreckastow 3 points ago +10 / -7

We are talking about reality and in reality, whoever spends the most money wins an election over 90% of the time.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2014/04/04/think-money-doesnt-matter-in-elections-this-chart-says-youre-wrong/

You gotta decide, do you just want rich people to be able to buy whatever candidate they want? Cause that is what this ruling allows.

100 million of us STILL cannot outspend just a few uber rich people.

16
Jon888 16 points ago +16 / -0

No but he isn't an ideologue, he ruled based on what the constitution says. And it says if I want to yell trump is great on tv, I can do that. If 100,000 people get together and want to yell trump is great, they can do that. And doing just that is protected free speech. Scalia was right, and if you want to change it then just amend the constitution.

0
Necrovoter 0 points ago +2 / -2

He did try to rule based on the Constitution. It says NOTHING about companies having any free speech rights. NADA. ZIP. SCOTUS was 100% wrong in pulling that fabrication out of their ass.

Rights are given to citizens (NOT Foreigners in the US either!) and to the states. The Federal government has a very limited set of rights directly related to duties they must carry out.

The Constitution should be paramount. NOT prior rulings of federal judges or even SCOTUS. Yes, it takes more effort to decide when a precedent was faulty and does not follow the Constitution, but it must be done.

An obvious example would be a US District Court judge ruling that SCOTUS does not have the authority to review any cases. Then an appeals court upholds the District Court judge, and lastly SCOTUS itself upholds the appeals court, based on precedent.

Yes, they really are that stupid and stubborn at times.

2
Jon888 2 points ago +2 / -0

SCOTUS only relies on SCOTUS precedent, not lower district's precedent. Rights are not even given by the government or even the constitution, we just have them endowed by our creator and this fact is codified by our constitution. Also saying the rights in the constitution was only meant for citizens is untrue. They are restrictions placed on our government to protect everyone from it within the united states. Some of these supreme court rulings establishing that date back to the 1800's.

1
Necrovoter 1 point ago +1 / -0

SCOTUS only relies on SCOTUS precedent

This is false.

saying the rights in the constitution was only meant for citizens is untrue.

They are restrictions placed on our government

This is correct.

to protect everyone from it within the united states.

This is not. Otherwise slavery would never have been allowed. Women would not have been prohibited from voting. The founding fathers certainly didn't misunderstand the constitution that they wrote themselves.

Some of these supreme court rulings establishing that date back to the 1800's.

That's another SCOTUS fabrication. The expansion of the 14th amendment rights were derived from battles between the states, the federal government and private entities building railroad or owning land the railroads wanted. The application to include all people was a further judicially created expansion of this.

Using SCOTUS to support SCOTUS decisions is like using CNN to fact check CNN.

8
deleted 8 points ago +8 / -0
3
UpTrump 3 points ago +3 / -0

And Dems always far outraise GOP in national races

2
RedditIs4Retards 2 points ago +3 / -1

Well we live in a reality in which when Globalists own our entire government they can just rig the election and win it, and then call PATRIOTS the domestic terrorists when they stand inside a building after being let inside.

1
Wreckastow 1 point ago +1 / -0

That is a restricted building, can we be honest without ourselves for second?

We keep acting like all those patriots were angels, that shit aint the case.

1
RedditIs4Retards 1 point ago +1 / -0

Was the federal courthouse in Portland not restricted? Is it not restricted to throw bricks at Feds and blind them with green lasers? Is it not restricted to murder 40+ during BLM protests, including 9 cops?

Those patriots were USHERED in . The police LET them in, so the Dems can frame us as Domestic terrorists (they were already labeling us as such for the last year already).

3
Wreckastow 3 points ago +3 / -0

Oh you didn't hear?

Those were not BLM protestors, those were Patriot Plants sent to make BLM look bad, those BLM/antifa folks are all angels.

This is our new reality, zero accountability and infinite finger pointing, come on in and sit a spell, get a window seat.

1
redbeard 1 point ago +1 / -0

Only because we aren't organized.