Knowing that the Palm Beach Post always has a left-winged slant to its editorials, I finally agree with them 100% on a recent editorial regarding the Supreme Court’s recent decision allowing corporations to spend as much as they want on election advertising thus influencing the outcome of our national elections.
Corporations are not citizens, therefore by that explanation alone, they should not have the same guarantees of free speech as does an individual.
No one, however, has mentioned the simple fact that foreign countries now can have a big foot-hold in the outcome thus controlling our government. Foreign corporations, even some controlled by their governments, can funnel money into their
What a group has to say—
The fact is that we now live in a world of giant transnational corporations, with allegiance to NO sovereign government, let alone our own, sworn only to exploit the most vulnerable and desperate workers they can find in any country of the world. How does The Supreme Court 5 propose parsing which of these extra-national legal artificialities should be allowed to corrupt our democratic election process? Apparently in their minds, all of them.
Action Page: Corporations Are NOT The People..
This commentary is wrong on so many levels that it is difficult to point out all of the misstatements. So lets concentrate on the most pervasive; i.e., that of the foreign corporations.
ReplyDeleteIn a demagogic bid to score populist points, Obama claimed that the decision striking down restrictions on corporate spending opened "the floodgates for special interests -- including foreign corporations -- to spend without limit in our elections." In fact, the justices explicitly left untouched a statute that bans election spending by foreign corporations, even "indirectly.
There isn't even a "loophole" for US subsidiaries of foreign firms, as the White House later claimed in a bid to defend the president's false charge.
Alarmists (such as the author) say the court's ruling will mean torrential spending by large for-profit corporations. Anna Burger, secretary-treasurer of the Service Employees International Union -- it has spent $20 million on politics in the past five election cycles -- says a corporation will "funnel their shareholders' money straight to a campaign's coffers." Wrong. Corporate contributions to candidates' campaigns remain proscribed.
As with almost everything political, 'Truth & History' become whatever is repeated the most.....hence the introduction of the "Cascade Theory" which states that the more a lie is repeated the more people will come to believe that lie.
Sadly, the "Cascade Theory" seems to have trapped another victim.....that victim being the keeper of this web site.