Supreme Court rejects corporate campaign spending limits

[askmrjesus]

Originally Posted by goof2

Opposing earmarks isn't new. I supported the guy who said he was going to do it in the last election. That didn't work out so well.

He wouldn't have had a better chance getting it done as President, then he does as a Senator anyway.

Originally Posted by goof2

I agree with you that politicians are far too corrupted by money. Where we disagree is on the solution to that problem. Controlling the money is a useless endeavor similar to trying to close all the loopholes in the tax code. It's like a kid in Holland trying to plug a leak. The water will find other ways. It is the politicians that need to be controlled. The problem with that is it is the politicians who decide how they are controlled. I hope we aren't fucked, but we very well could be.

The problem is so ingrained in our present system, that we would likely have to attack it from both directions, just to keep up with all the lawyers. I'd love to see a public referendum on the issue, but that's not going to happen either.

Originally Posted by goof2

BTW, your newsletter better not junk up my mailbox and if you sell my info to credit card companies I'm going to be pissed!

Shit, there goes my whole plan.

JC