The Story of Citizens United vs. FEC

Submitted by: madest 5 years ago

An exploration of the inordinate power that corporations exercise in our democracy.
There are 78 comments:
Male 83
Profit needs to be hard capped. There is no justification for the amount of money these corporations make. America is now fascist.
0
Reply
Male 10,845
[quote]You`re saying being tired, having low blood pressure and a dystonic reaction(That can generally be cured with benydryl) is worse than wanting to kill yourself?[/quote]

No I`m not saying that at all. If anything I`d like a medication that treats my condition and gives me none of those. Also, the age of the article does not make it any less relevant jackass.
0
Reply
Male 75
By the way your source is about 12 years outdated you stupid drat.
0
Reply
Male 75
Really Dude? You`re saying being tired, having low blood pressure and a dystonic reaction(That can generally be cured with benydryl) is worse than wanting to kill yourself? Holy poo Man.
0
Reply
Male 80
this was a whole lot of obvious for anyone whoever took an american government class.
0
Reply
Male 10,845
Hell I use Google and they just asked me to give them my telephone number in case I forgot my (brace yourself)...




...password.


Hell Facebook asks you to give MORE personal information for MORE LEVELS of security. Ironic much?
0
Reply
Male 10,845
There was also a time in America where meat packers could label their products what ever the hell they wanted even if it WAS deceptive.

So while it may be good for GDP it does not necessarily mean it`s good for life expectancy/longevity.
0
Reply
Male 10,845
...cont

...the Chantix debacle

CT Scans make a LOT more money for doctors than MRIs, yet are incredibly more dangerous (because they`re practically (and aptly named) "super X-rays").
0
Reply
Male 10,845
From the critique:

"Rent-seeking corporations are actually pushing for regulations adding barriers to entry into the marketplace."

I agree with Mr. Doren that is the case in Texas.

"...so it`s bad when Microsoft makes money off a product that enhances the lives of everyone that uses it?"

Okay her assertion was a stretch but not completely invalid.
Companies have promoted anti-psychotics for a while and while they are good at treating the condition, they`ve caused some rather unpleasant side effects such as Lethargy, Hypotension, Various Dystonias.

Then there was t
Male 10,845
[quote]We Americans love being lectured about the constitution by Europeans and Canadians. It`s high comedy.[/quote]

Ad Hominem.

But oh sure I love being lectured about the constitution by a guy from the United Arab Emirates (especially when knows what the hell he`s talking about). It`s high comedy.
0
Reply
Male 546
Good video rebuttal jonfandal, thanks for posting it.
0
Reply
Male 311
counter: church and state
0
Reply
Male 2
0
Reply
Male 546
Does a corporation pay taxes?

What is a corporation? I have a friend that owns all the shares in a carpet cleaning business and it is a corporation. He and his wife are the only employees.
0
Reply
Male 4,547
Crakr:
"And if people were really concerned about `corporations` campaign finance contributions, They should`ve looked into..."

Oh, what a scientific methodology. You`re totally right, they should`ve looked into (and only into) that candidate you personally didn`t support....

Lets take a more reasonable look at this. What should people look at if they really care? I`m going to say: The total amount given by corporations to either party, compared to individual donors.

I`ll start you off, here`s wall street`s contributions:



P.S. I`m happy to limit *all* campaign contributions, irrespective of who it benefits. You gonna say the same or are you gonna wait till you see if it benefits Reps/Dems?
0
Reply
Male 4,547
"From the video: corporations spent 300 million dollars on campaigns.
Reality: UNIONS spent 400 million in 2008. "

Do you know you`re a dirty deceptive liar or was that accidental?

From the video: MIDTERM.
Your second stat: Presidential.

Also from the video if you pay attention: The $300 is more than the last 20 years combined for a midterm.

Ergo, the opposite of what you`re suggesting is true, is the actual truth.

I`ll assume for now you simply made a mistake.
0
Reply
Male 25
Oh nooooooo.....evil profits. It should just be illegal to make money. That would make everything better.
0
Reply
Male 36,543
[quote]We Americans love being lectured about the constitution by Europeans and Canadians. It`s high comedy.[/quote]
Well @madest, YOU sure don`t know diddely-squat about it! BURN! lolz!
This video completely ignores the actual issue: the Feds made a law that says Corp A CAN talk politics before an election, but Corp B CANNOT. This is the same as saying "blacks can vote, but not whites" (for an extreme example) and is clearly UNCONSTITUTIONAL. Duh!
But Annie doesn`t even address this! All she does is rant about how evil corporations are destroying the world.

@Lazyme he agenda is to have the government (leftist of course) control the whole world. Corporations are seen (in her deranged world view) as compeditors to Big Government and, therefor, are evil.
Voters are evil too, unless they vote for the lefties - see the Wisconson protestors? They claim to "fight for democracy" by shutting down a duely elected goverment! Oh the irony!
0
Reply
Male 8
"Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press;..."

Yeah, that totally means Congress can pass some laws restricting speech based on who or what the source of the speech is. Yeah...
0
Reply
Male 7,378
We Americans love being lectured about the constitution by Europeans and Canadians. It`s high comedy.
0
Reply
Male 8
Groups of people driven by profit shouldn`t be given a collective voice, but other groups of people should be. That`s democracy?
0
Reply
Male 1,364
i thought it was about a football club. kind of disapointed now.
0
Reply
Male 1,293
madest

Learn English. Read the constitution. Note that no-one has given corporations individual rights. The Supreme Court upheld a Constitutional limit on the power of Congress, a clear and unequivocal one. That is all. Then stop the hysterics and personal attacks. They make you look an idiot.
0
Reply
Male 1,293
screwzlooose

You use classic left-wing dishonesty, cutting off your quote. The preamble starts "We the people" but what about them? They "...do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America". The people are those establishing the Constitution, not those to whom it applies.

Secondly that clause of the first amendment clearly limits congress. It does not mention the "people". It says "Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech". Congress made a law. Congress therefore broke the constitution, and the law was unconstitutional.

In addition to your flawed logic in the wording of the clause, under your logic only people would have a right to freedom of the press. If that clause does not apply to corporations then it is pretty useless.

obhwfgirl

On what basis do you claim that your government decided corporations are people? I have seen no suggestion off that.
0
Reply
Male 7,378
[quote]this is a liberal cartoon. Conservative ideal calls for "hands-off" economy.[/quote]
----------------
So what you`re trying to say is that corporations should have individual rights because it`s good for the economy for them to be able to do anything they want so long as they use their profits to fund the campaigns of the politicians that`ll change the rules in the corporations favor? Just like our forefathers wanted...
0
Reply
Female 9
@LazyMe484
The "fact" that we have a two party system and the "fact" that people are stupid is an argument FOR the Supreme Court`s ruling. See video #4. The politicians will now have more competition because of this.
0
Reply
Male 1,222
First thing i noticed is that its produced by a studio, isnt that a corporation?
0
Reply
Male 10,440
Lee doren`s video is full of holes. Sometimes his logic works, but here he is building his house of cards on the idea that people will be able to vote for a candidate that will do what they want regardless of corporate interference. Smart people can see through BS advertising, but most people aren`t smart.

But, as I said before, this is irrelevant if you have just 2 parties to begin with. If the choice is evil or more evil, your vote won`t affect much anyway.
0
Reply
Female 9
@5Cats
That video has already been posted twice.
Video #4
0
Reply
Male 10,440
Problem #1 with the US govt. is that it only has 2 parties and people`s views aren`t being represented, regardless of "corporate influence".

[quote] she`s a liberal elitist with a hidden agenda. [/quote]

And what could be her agenda exactly? Any ideas?
0
Reply
Male 15,832
What a f***ing stupid c*nt she is.
0
Reply
Male 36,543
From the video: corporations spent 300 million dollars on campaigns.
Reality: UNIONS spent 400 million in 2008.
SO: who`s `buying politicians` in the USA?

[quote]I`m surprised no one has mentioned the sly little twist in their proposed amendment: specifying restricting rights for FOR-PROFIT corporations.[/quote]

Nice catch there @Oldfrt! She wants he precious unions to be free to spend, but not those who disagree with her! Also, the company that made this video is a corporation too, kinda ironic, eh?

Go watch Lee Doren`s video!

0
Reply
Male 36,543
And here`s WHAT`S WRONG in this video.

Lee Doren has ripped the "logic" and "facts" presented in many of A.Leonard`s videos. Of course it takes longer to explain WHY she`s wrong than it does for her to spout nonsense and distortions, eh? In short: she`s a liberal elitist with a hidden agenda.
0
Reply
Male 2,402
Why are they blaming the 2010 Supreme Court decision on advertising on corporations for candidates. This poo has been going on since the formation of America. It`s just more publicized now instead of behind closed doors.
0
Reply
Male 17,512
screwzlooose: The supreme court did not say that corporations are equal to people. "Freedom of the press" means that any company, group of people, can publish their opinion on any subject, not just politics.

Corporations can not vote, only the shareholders of a company are protected from prosecution (provided they are not involved in making day-to-day business decisions). The executives that run corporations can, and have been, prosecuted for crimes under the law.

And if people were really concerned about `corporations` campaign finance contributions, They should`ve looked into the enormous amounts Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, Time Warner, and Microsoft gave to Obama.

Goldman Sachs $994,795
Microsoft Corp $833,617
Google Inc $803,436
Citigroup Inc $701,290
JPMorgan Chase & Co $695,132
Time Warner $590,084
UBS AG $543,219
IBM Corp $528,822
0
Reply
Male 749
@Blitzkreig10 - You hit the nail on the head. Also, I`m surprised no one has mentioned the sly little twist in their proposed amendment: specifying restricting rights for FOR-PROFIT corporations. This means that Unions, PAC`s and other very large organizations can still spend millions (as they do now). So once again, another liberal is saying we should forcibly silence their opposition while giving "their guys" carte blanc.

This is why liberalism will ultimately fail. They think the general public is stupid. We all know the general public isn`t stupid, they are lazy and would rather not deal with the shrill little liberal whiners.
0
Reply
Female 582
1) The USA is a republic, not a democracy.

2) The moment that our government decided that corporations were people, we were drated. Corporations represent the jobs of people, the goods of people, the ideals of people, and they are composed of people, but they are not people.
0
Reply
Male 5,194
>>I love how it`s dumbed down for the common american.

So incredibly dumbed down and patronizing I can`t even sit through it. Somebody explain to Annie Leonard that she`s addressing voters, not kindergarten.
0
Reply
Male 384
jrtebowski: no , we`re a capitalist republic with elected lawmakers.
0
Reply
Male 384
so,the bill of rights is granted to the "we the people", according to the preamble.... so, if a corporation is now a person, does that mean a corporation can be arrested, or deported,or even given the death penalty if found guilty of crimes?
0
Reply
Female 9
@madest
[quote]You`re wrong. To spew it as fact makes you seem incredibly retarded.[/quote]


In actuality what has been stated applies more directly to you than to randomxnp. I`m sure you can come up with something better other than "You`re wrong" and logical fallacies such as ad hominem.
0
Reply
Male 19
Lol this is a liberal cartoon. Conservative ideal calls for "hands-off" economy.
0
Reply
Male 2
Ok, here is my opinion on this video. Essentially what this video is implying is that the corporations were the sole reason why these politicians are put into the positions they are. However, that is not the case. Corporations simply paid for the ads you see on television, hear on the radio, etc. It is still the people who voted them in as corporations can not vote. So in the end it is the voter`s responsibility to get educated on the facts and find out what politicians have to say on certain issues. You cannot blame corporations for voters making ill-advised decisions and for politicians who give in to corporate power.
0
Reply
Male 76
Well USA, you`re drated.
0
Reply
Male 7,378
[quote]The Supreme Court did nothing of the sort. It simply enforced the US Constitution.[/quote]
----------
You`re wrong. To spew it as fact makes you seem incredibly retarded.
0
Reply
Male 1,293
And no, goaliejerry, your Constitution is not what the Supreme Court says. Your Constitution is what is written. It might be, in fact often is, misinterpreted, even by the Supreme Court (it is impossible to find any justification for Roe vs. Wade anywhere in your Constitution, even for someone who supports a right to access to abortion as I do; except in federal laws the Constitution does not demand any separation of church and state, and even as an atheist I cannot see how anyone with a three-figure IQ could read it that way).

This video tries to say this is one such case, which is a lie.

Does it really take a Englishman to teach you about your own Constitution?
0
Reply
Male 1,293
goaliejerry

I not only read your Constitution, but quoted it directly in my comment. That you failed to recognise this suggests that you have not read it.

The first amendment: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances"

Notice that "people" are specifically mentioned in the peaceable assembly clause and implicitly in the redress of grievance. The freedom of speech and the press clause are unequivocal in the literal meaning, that I do know thank you. They are restriction on congress`s power, with no mention of "people".

If you still doubt, note that freedom of speech is gathered in a clause with press freedom. The latter must apply to corporations, it must be inferred that the former specifically
0
Reply
Male 1,625
Brilliant Video.
0
Reply
Male 1,293
Jamie76

"The supreme court DID make the ruling in 2010 that a corp. has the same rights as a PERSON"

The Supreme Court did nothing of the sort. It simply enforced the US Constitution. t did not say anything about the rights of corporation, it restricted the power of congress to that offered by the US Constitution as currently amended.

If you can`t see that distinction, then your understanding of the English language is too poor to have a reasoned debate.
0
Reply
Female 9
@jamie76
[quote]I OWN my own successful business and I do not support companies having free speech rights [/quote]
I don`t want my right to X therefore no one should have it.

[quote]Nor should anyone that values the people`s voice over a company`s wish to see the laws they want enacted by buying their way into power.[/quote]
I don`t value one group of people enforcing their will on another group. So I don`t advocate democracy. It`s anti-minority. Note: When I say minority, I don`t mean race.
0
Reply
Male 2,345
loneagwolf

this is actually VERY true. The supreme court DID make the ruling in 2010 that a corp. has the same rights as a PERSON and thus can spend as MUCH AS THEY WANT ON AN ELECTION.

Now, i know you are most likely a republican, business class and think that busness should be left to do whatever they want but sorry, there are many of us that DONT FEEL THAT WAY.

I OWN my own successful business and I do not support companies having free speech rights. Nor should anyone that values the people`s voice over a company`s wish to see the laws they want enacted by buying their way into power.
0
Reply
Male 6
This is such a load of bull$hit...talk about misleading crap and flat out lies.
0
Reply
Male 559
85% of Americans feel that corporations have too much power yet half of them do something and take it to the polls.
0
Reply
Male 734
Her first mistake was stating that we are in a democracy, which we aren`t here in the United States. We are a republic, not a democracy. BIIIIIG difference!
0
Reply
Female 709
I can see how the smart, politically active people don`t want corporations to send out ads that will influence the dumb majority of America that is bought with ads rather than facts, but technically this isn`t a violation of the first amendment. A corporation isn`t REALLY a machine: it isn`t going to choose someone of its own will to sponsor in a campaign. At least one person working in or for that corporation has to make the decision for corporate dollars to be spent on campaigns. One person who has first amendment rights. The corporation is just a label for all the PEOPLE working in that business, not a separate entity altogether. In my opinion, I`d say that corporations shouldn`t have influence on who they want voted for, but the people in the corporations have rights they deserve to have.
0
Reply
Male 78
the impression i got from this video is that americans are people who vote based on the ads they see
0
Reply
Male 1,744
this should be filed under "no duh"
0
Reply
Male 25,416
meh
0
Reply
Male 1,610
jtrebowski

My definition is more specific than yours. I win.
0
Reply
Male 17,512
chimmeychang: [quote]Also, ALL ELECTED OFFICIALS, should have ALL OF THEIR FINANCES BE A MATTER OF PUBLIC RECORD.[/quote]

McCain-Feingold law makes all political contributions a matter of public record already. The only problem is when corporations make donations to candidates in the names of their employees and get around the campaign finance limits that way.
0
Reply
Male 17,512
Socialist propaganda again, Corporations are evil, Profit is immoral, Voters too stupid to know what is good for them, Capitalism is monstrous, etc..

Our constitution is fine as is. Corporations can not vote, only humans can.
0
Reply
Female 9
0
Reply
Male 3,364
@brassbull and Icedragon: You`re both wrong. We are a Democratic republic, and slowly becoming more and more a democracy.

@volsunga: "Obnoxious propaganda piece"? Do you really deny that corporations have been given way too much power over us as voters? Why don`t you stand up for yourself instead of being some sort of wimpy corporate shill?
0
Reply
Male 57
http://www.youtube.com /watch?v=tJEeKez1Jlw
0
Reply
Male 1,610
We`re not a democracy, we`re a constitutional republic.
0
Reply
Male 490
Democracy? Last I heard we were supposed to be a republic. O.=.o
0
Reply
Male 125
I feel insulted after watching this. Do they think I`m five years old? I hate how much people cater to the stupid. It only serves to reinforce their stupidity and gives them no incentive to learn something for once.
0
Reply
Male 1,548
What an obnoxious propaganda piece. I hope this isn`t being shown to actual children.
0
Reply
Male 4,014
"The Court simply interpreted the constitution, which is unequivocal."

Its cute how you think that`s true. What is actually true is that what the Constitution says is what 5 of 9 Supreme Court Justices say. Replace one Republican appointed Supreme Court Justice with a Democrat, and suddenly the case comes out differently. Did the meaning of the Constitution change? Well, yeah, it just depends on who you ask.

But to say the Constitution is "unequivocal" is laughable. Have you ever actually read it?????? Do you know what "unequivocal" means?????
0
Reply
Male 295
I love how it`s dumbed down for the common american.
0
Reply
Female 1,356
... alrighty then!
0
Reply
Male 1,293
Chimmeychang of course has the answer.

Sunlight is the best disinfectant. Elected officials should have great authority but almost total scrutiny. Most have to face the next election, and I believe most in the US are subject to recall.

This Supreme Court case is in fact positive, it is part of the scrutiny. Elected officials must stick to the constitution. I wish ours would, or our courts cared as much as yours does about our constitution.
0
Reply
Male 1,455
Nothing will change unless you guys learn how to vote. The fact that merely half your country does so and you still like to call yourself a "democracy" blows my mind.
0
Reply
Male 1,293
"Congress shall make no law ... or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press"

It`s your constitution, not mine.

The First Amendment to the US constitution doesn`t allow for any law abridging fee speech or press freedom, whether the law affects people or organisations, whatever the nature of the organisation.

So this video starts with a lie: that it is down to the Supreme Court. The Court simply interpreted the constitution, which is unequivocal.

The text is also really patronising. It treats people as dumb, being "told who to vote for" by corporations. Note, not by unions, or by agenda-driven, publicity hungry international organisations. Of course this stupid leftie then knows far better than the people of the US what they want; they want what she says they want, but nasty Chevron is forcing them to vote against their own desires.

This is pure propaganda, lies and spin. Usually leftie crap.
0
Reply
Male 166
On one hand, I agree with everything she says. On the other hand, she annoys the living poo out of me with her chipper "Let`s take our country back!" platitudes. Do you have a concrete, feasible plan? Then let`s hear it, instead of telling Americans like little children something we all know.
0
Reply
Male 1
Hey Citizens United... If you don`t like the size and power of a corporation, it`s easy to fix. DON`T BUY THEIR PRODUCT! It`s hilarious how many of you scream and cry and moan at the size of Exxon, their power, and their quarterly profits, yet you pull into the Exxon station for a fill-up and put Exxon oil in your engine every 3000 miles!
It`s amuzing that your only answer to every problem is to let government grow and control that entity without ever opening your freaking minds to the fact that it`s the government causing the problems!
0
Reply
Male 684
I think corporation should be allowed to donate as much money as they want to election campaigns, but the money should be split evenly among the candidates.Also, ALL ELECTED OFFICIALS, should have ALL OF THEIR FINANCES BE A MATTER OF PUBLIC RECORD. we forget they work for us, we should really really remind them...
0
Reply
Male 7,378
Link: The Story of Citizens United vs. FEC [Rate Link] - An exploration of the inordinate power that corporations exercise in our democracy.
0
Reply