So when will candidates have to wear logo patches on their suits to appear in public the way Nascar drivers have those patches all over the suits they race in?
Because people are idiots. Oh, not you! of course. Persons individually are just fine, it’s those… other people, ya know. Them! Total morons. All of them.
The first amendment does not apply to corporations. It only applies to people. There were no corporations when the constitution was written. The Preamble of the constitution starts by saying we the people not we the corporations. In the future, this court will be ridiculed much as the courts that supported slavery in the past. Do you really want a corporation controlled overseas to influence an election here? What next? Will illegal immigrants, organized crime, terrorists and extra-terrestrials be allowed to contribute to their favored candidates? I’m sure you will enjoy it when your employer endorses a candidate who opposes your interests.
SMOKY I’m sure you are a person who follows the news and issues. Therefore, how is a last minute ad campaign going to influence you? If corporation X wants to put its money on candidate Y, I don’t see how that would affect the informed voter.
Of course all sorts of special issues groups are now allowed to influence the vote. All sorts of do-gooder organizations want to save orphaned raccoons, waste tax dollars on searching for moon men, and giving money to people who won’t try for themselves. They are covered by the first amendment as are the KKK.
A corporation is a group of people working towards a goal, much like the Democrats. Check your 401k, you May be a member of one. To say one that wants deeps space burial for one eyed cats deserves free speech, and the one that builds a better mousetrap to help mankind should be censored by the government that decree free speech the first right is ridiculous.Let’s burn books.
LewReader and, negatively, the last panel of the strip are on the right track.
The stuck-pig Leftist squeals about this Court decision are based on an assumption that the voters are mindless sheep (apparently what GinRummy believes). The Left has always looked down on everyone but “One of Us”. That is why they assume, for example, that the Tea Party movement must be the creation of corporate pressure groups, not the spontaneous reaction of large numbers of people concerned about American freedom.
The Leftists have always believed in THE PEOPLE but not in people. In the same collectivist way, they somehow think that corporations are great evil entities and not the workers, managers, executives, and most important, stockholders, all of whom DO have rights under the Constitution.
Who, in a large corporation gets to decide where they will spend potentially billions of dollars in political races? Are you going to think that a common stockholder has much influence? How about the worker bee’s? Middle management? Yeah, right.
Think of some of the slickest advertising on radio and tv. Who does it best? What do they want to sell you? Do we buy the products? You bet. Will we buy the political ads that don’t tell the truth? You bet.
Is this a bad decision? You bet.
Sorry, Lew, it doesn’t violate free speech to stop corporations & labor unions from buying ads for candidates. Free speech is sacrosanct, but it is not unlimited. Nothing stops any PERSON within the corporation from handing out flyers encouraging voters to vote for your beloved Sarah Palin or, better, to draft Rush Limbaugh. That doesn’t mean that the corporation–as a multi-national body–has the same rights. Freedom of speech is an individual right.
1) There were no corporations when the constitution was written.
False. Corporations have existed since the Roman Empire was in full flower. For a more timely example of one on American soil, there is the British East India Company. There have been some (many) changes in corporate structures and rules, but the statement above is definitively false.
2) The first amendment does not apply to corporations.
Obviously it does, at least at present. That is what the Supreme Court affirmed. The reasoning is that a corporation is essentially a “artificial person.” Indeed, that is a large part of the point of incorporating.
3) Freedom of speech is an individual right.
Says who? Maybe it is, but there is nothing in a simple declaration that would make it so.
I dislike the Supreme Court’s ruling, but it is in all senses legally correct. We should be working to change the way corporations are defined and treated so as to curtail some of the rights they currently do possess, the right under question here being one of them.
1) There were no corporations when the constitution was written.
False. Corporations have existed since the Roman Empire was in full flower. For a more timely example of one on American soil, there is the British East India Company. There have been some (many) changes in corporate structures and rules, but the statement above is definitively false.
2) The first amendment does not apply to corporations.
Obviously it does, at least at present. That is what the Supreme Court affirmed. The reasoning is that a corporation is essentially a “artificial person.” Indeed, that is a large part of the point of incorporating.
3) Freedom of speech is an individual right.
Says who? Maybe it is, but there is nothing in a simple declaration that would make it so.
I dislike the Supreme Court’s ruling, but it is in all senses legally correct. We should be working to change the way corporations are defined and treated so as to curtail some of the rights they currently do possess, the right under question here being one of them.
ejcapulet over 14 years ago
So when will candidates have to wear logo patches on their suits to appear in public the way Nascar drivers have those patches all over the suits they race in?
lewisbower over 14 years ago
First amendment/ Free Speech. And that’s wrong why?
Ginrummy33 over 14 years ago
Because people are idiots. Oh, not you! of course. Persons individually are just fine, it’s those… other people, ya know. Them! Total morons. All of them.
SmokyStover over 14 years ago
The first amendment does not apply to corporations. It only applies to people. There were no corporations when the constitution was written. The Preamble of the constitution starts by saying we the people not we the corporations. In the future, this court will be ridiculed much as the courts that supported slavery in the past. Do you really want a corporation controlled overseas to influence an election here? What next? Will illegal immigrants, organized crime, terrorists and extra-terrestrials be allowed to contribute to their favored candidates? I’m sure you will enjoy it when your employer endorses a candidate who opposes your interests.
lewisbower over 14 years ago
SMOKY I’m sure you are a person who follows the news and issues. Therefore, how is a last minute ad campaign going to influence you? If corporation X wants to put its money on candidate Y, I don’t see how that would affect the informed voter. Of course all sorts of special issues groups are now allowed to influence the vote. All sorts of do-gooder organizations want to save orphaned raccoons, waste tax dollars on searching for moon men, and giving money to people who won’t try for themselves. They are covered by the first amendment as are the KKK. A corporation is a group of people working towards a goal, much like the Democrats. Check your 401k, you May be a member of one. To say one that wants deeps space burial for one eyed cats deserves free speech, and the one that builds a better mousetrap to help mankind should be censored by the government that decree free speech the first right is ridiculous.Let’s burn books.
pschearer Premium Member over 14 years ago
LewReader and, negatively, the last panel of the strip are on the right track.
The stuck-pig Leftist squeals about this Court decision are based on an assumption that the voters are mindless sheep (apparently what GinRummy believes). The Left has always looked down on everyone but “One of Us”. That is why they assume, for example, that the Tea Party movement must be the creation of corporate pressure groups, not the spontaneous reaction of large numbers of people concerned about American freedom.
The Leftists have always believed in THE PEOPLE but not in people. In the same collectivist way, they somehow think that corporations are great evil entities and not the workers, managers, executives, and most important, stockholders, all of whom DO have rights under the Constitution.
napaeric over 14 years ago
Who, in a large corporation gets to decide where they will spend potentially billions of dollars in political races? Are you going to think that a common stockholder has much influence? How about the worker bee’s? Middle management? Yeah, right. Think of some of the slickest advertising on radio and tv. Who does it best? What do they want to sell you? Do we buy the products? You bet. Will we buy the political ads that don’t tell the truth? You bet. Is this a bad decision? You bet.
BrianCrook about 14 years ago
Sorry, Lew, it doesn’t violate free speech to stop corporations & labor unions from buying ads for candidates. Free speech is sacrosanct, but it is not unlimited. Nothing stops any PERSON within the corporation from handing out flyers encouraging voters to vote for your beloved Sarah Palin or, better, to draft Rush Limbaugh. That doesn’t mean that the corporation–as a multi-national body–has the same rights. Freedom of speech is an individual right.
EarlOfCork over 13 years ago
A few untruths above:
1) There were no corporations when the constitution was written. False. Corporations have existed since the Roman Empire was in full flower. For a more timely example of one on American soil, there is the British East India Company. There have been some (many) changes in corporate structures and rules, but the statement above is definitively false.
2) The first amendment does not apply to corporations. Obviously it does, at least at present. That is what the Supreme Court affirmed. The reasoning is that a corporation is essentially a “artificial person.” Indeed, that is a large part of the point of incorporating.
3) Freedom of speech is an individual right. Says who? Maybe it is, but there is nothing in a simple declaration that would make it so.
I dislike the Supreme Court’s ruling, but it is in all senses legally correct. We should be working to change the way corporations are defined and treated so as to curtail some of the rights they currently do possess, the right under question here being one of them.
EarlOfCork over 13 years ago
A few untruths above:
1) There were no corporations when the constitution was written. False. Corporations have existed since the Roman Empire was in full flower. For a more timely example of one on American soil, there is the British East India Company. There have been some (many) changes in corporate structures and rules, but the statement above is definitively false.
2) The first amendment does not apply to corporations. Obviously it does, at least at present. That is what the Supreme Court affirmed. The reasoning is that a corporation is essentially a “artificial person.” Indeed, that is a large part of the point of incorporating.
3) Freedom of speech is an individual right. Says who? Maybe it is, but there is nothing in a simple declaration that would make it so.
I dislike the Supreme Court’s ruling, but it is in all senses legally correct. We should be working to change the way corporations are defined and treated so as to curtail some of the rights they currently do possess, the right under question here being one of them.