Quantcast

Comments about ‘Alito defends Citizens United decision, cites newspapers, TV in corporate campaign spending adjudication’

Return to article »

Published: Saturday, Nov. 17 2012 10:33 p.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
JoeBlow
Far East USA, SC

I have to believe that the Citizens United ruling was correct based on law.

So then, where now?

It is a fact that more money was spent on this presidential election than ever before.

And most would agree that campaign donations often require payback.
Is this the new normal that we want? Does all this money make the elections better or worse?

I think we would be better served if we got the money out of elections. All money. Corporate, union, and any other special interest group.

Until then we will have the best Republican and Democrat legislators that money can buy.

Third try screen name
Mapleton, UT

It's hard to take the critics on the left when they dominated lobbying and campaign money with the NEA and the SEIU money for decades.

Esquire
Springville, UT

Alito is dead wrong. How is it that a corporation has more free speech than an individual? Why is money the standard for free speech? Why does a fictional entity even have rights under the Bill of Rights? A newspaper will not hide in anonymity like the current political speech system. Alito is part of a court majority that will go down in history as one of the worst.

XelaDave
Salem, UT

One of the great evils with which our own nation is menaced at the present time is the wonderful growth of wealth in the hands of a comparatively few individuals. The very liberties for which our fathers contended so steadfastly and courageously, and which they bequeathed to us as a priceless legacy, are endangered by the monstrous power which this accumulation of wealth gives to a few individuals and a few powerful corporations. By its seductive influence results are accomplished which, were it more equally distributed, would be impossible under our form of government. It threatens to give shape to the legislation, both State and National, of the entire country. If this evil should not be checked, and measures not taken to prevent the continued enormous growth of riches among the class already rich, and the painful increase of destitution and want among the poor, the nation is likely to be overtaken by disaster; for, according to history, such a tendency among nations once powerful was the sure precursor of ruin.- Brigham Young

Cats
Somewhere in Time, UT

Free speech is free speech.

Furry1993
Ogden, UT

To Cats 8:09 a.m. Nov. 18, 2012

Free speech is free speech.

-----------------

True, but a corporation is not a person. People, not corporations, have the constitutional right to free speech. The Citizens United case was wrongly decided.

xscribe
Colorado Springs, CO

Cats: Free speech is not free speech. I can name you multiple reasons that free speech is denied, such as yelling fire in a public building, joking about blowing up a plane, making threats, but not going through with them, against the president or others, and on and on. There is a certain denial of free speech where it makes absolute sense to not allow that free speech, and this is one of them, for all sides of the political spectrum!

the truth
Holladay, UT

@Furry1993

Corporations are people, without people they are just empty buildings.

It has been decided legally,

and any, ANY dictionary defines corporations as a person.

More importantly the 1st amendment does not make any such distinction,

it just says that Congress can not make laws abridging free speech.

It says nothing more about it, other than the ninth and tenth amendment that ascertain that all rights belong to people and the states,, which includes any way they the people wish to assemble themselves.

Alito is right.

And the left is horribly wrong.

We can not allow the abridging and infringing of freedoms and liberties and rights for some.

And especially any law that is based on or plays on fear.

JoeBlow
Far East USA, SC

I hear the right complain constantly about the trial lawyer money going to the Left, and then there is the Union money.

We hear how this money is used to buy legislation.

I agree. It is a huge corrupting force.

I cannot understand how the right seems to think that more money in politics will produce a better result. I just dont get it.

But, it sure is hard to find a conservative who does not support the CU ruling.

Mark B
Eureka, CA

Doesn't Mr. truth see the difference between EMPLOYING people and actually BEING a person?

And did he really look in "any ANY dictionary" for his corporate definition?

Does anyone think that Alito would do anything OTHER than "double down" on the CU decision? He certainly isn't likely to say "we were wrong", is he?

But what I find most surprising is truth's insistence that spending millions on a campaign, even if it is someone else's money via stock ownership, must never be restricted because of "fear". His party rode the fear train to one win after another, and no one ever apologized for it. They tried it this year, too, but the train finally ran out of public steam.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments