Not a good thing at all. Everybody should have the freedom of speech but there should be limits on the cash contributions of that speech such that all speech is equal there.
Yes, the regulations that allowed SuperPACs are misguided. There are mistakes in the article, though.
I am not sure why Superpacs worry some so much. SEIU alone gave over 60 million to obama in 08 according to Andy Stern. quote from Stern "We spent a fortune to elect Barack Obama — $60.7 million to be exact — and we're proud of it." I know Bo was against the decision to allow Super pacs even insulting the Supremes over the decsion in a SOTU. Apparently his ethics and sense of right don't stop him now. so maybe we should overhaul both PACS and Super Pacs but supers should not get singled out.
You will not hear about the massive sums that flow to democrats from unions. that would go against the media message that the republicans are paid for by the rich in this country. i dont see what the big deal is anyway. a vote is a vote. the republicans are not digging up the names of dead bodies to vote for them.
I'm all for limiting influence-peddling in Washington by whatever means necessary. This White House is owned by the unions and that is an American tragedy.
If I want to donate millions of dollars to a cause, I have the right to do it. You people are starting to sound more and more like Nazi's, geez. Tell a person what they can and can't do, tough **** that you don't have that money, you have a every bit of a chance to earn it as the next guy and do what you want with it. Of course after you pay half of it to the Federal government, then 10% more to the state, plus your local city and sales tax. Then some people want you to pay more instead of investing it in new companies or growing companies.
i don't blame the people who want to voice their opinion with their money, and use their money as they see fit. I blame the politician and the morons who elect them. They are the ones so easily bought, so easily willing to break their oath to uphold the constitution, so eager to throw all that away for money. I also blame the public who votes for those who do not uphold their oath. Basically, it is our fault for electing these people and not holding them accountable when they sell their votes. It isn't the faul tof those who are doing the buying. It's their money.
What about Jeffrey Katzenberg who is accountable for 97% of the Priorities US Action Super PAC supporting Obama? All's fair in love, war, and politics.
Why are you fools framing this as a partison discussion? The players are abiding by the rules of the game. Under the current system theres zero chance of becoming president without the PAC's help. You either have a problem with a handful of unaccountable unelected people shaping policy for their own financial benefit, or you dont. I dont fault the politicians for their use of PACs, but I do have an issue with their inability and/or lack of motivation for limiting their influence.
Mich or BO First with correct answer wins and for Mitch bonus question, what Supreme court decision allowed creation of Super Pacs? double bonus when was the SCOTUS decision rendered? triple bonus if you have the cajones to apologize and quad bonus if you thank me for forcing you to learn something
So on 1/30/12 you incorrectly stated ” Super pacs certainly existed in 08. one example was a Soros Super pac, a smaller one was swiftboats in 04”.The Link On 2/22/12 Bevo Incognito writes “A superpac gave 60 million dollars to get Obama elected.” Later that day you had the nerve to tell Bevo Incognito: “You reveal your ignorance everyday” for making the mistake you had made several weeks earlier. And you want me to apologize for posting the picture about the pot calling the kettle black? BTW, it is cojones and not cajones unless you are talking about a set of drawers.
Mich No I did NOT say superpacs existed in 08. I was reposting another poster who said they existed and used the soros and swiftboat pacs as examples adn i was asking the difference and then I asked what the United decision was which as I knew was the decision that allowed Superpacs to be created in 2010 so on Jan 30 I read your link on super and did even more research which is why i knew on feb 22 that super pacs didn't exist in 08.
the point is not that your side does it too, so we should do it. The point is that allowing unions to buy the democratic party is wrong and allowing the wall street/corporate types to buy the republican party is wrong. We need a donation policay that only allows individuals to donate. And to donate at much more moderate levels. Do we really want a country where only big war chests make you a viable candidate? Don't we want a country where good ideas and policies get you elected? It's not necessary to point out that GOP is bought and paid for. Nor is it necessary to point out that Dems are bought and paid for. We all know that they both are.