NEWS: Soon The Supreme Court Will Destroy America

POLITICS: Soon The Supreme Court Will Destroy America

There’s an ugly, dark cloud on the horizon. It’s called Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission and it’s headed toward the Supreme Court in September. If all goes according to corporate whore and Supreme Court Chief Justice Roberts, America will be forever the slave of corporations. Democracy will be toast.

You thought our country was for sale now? You haven’t seen anything yet. This is the kind of shit Roberts and Alito were put on the bench for. The religious right were used by Bush to get right leaning judges on the bench – unfortunately, they are not the kind of right leaning judges they were hoping for. These guys are there to do whatever big business wants them to do. Chief Justice Roberts robe should look like a NASCAR driver's suit, covered in sponsors.

By the time Roberts retires, he will have done more to destroy the America we know than any other person alive. I wish that were hyperbole. It’s not. This week’s decision only proves my point.

Citizens United v. FEC started when the right wing group Citizens United made a 90 minute film about Hillary Clinton in 2008. They wanted to run it on TV stations in swing states. The FEC ruled it was not a documentary and slapped a “campaign ad” label on it. It then fell under McCain-Feingold spending restrictions and never aired. Citizens United sued.

The big surprise came last week, when Roberts saw an opportunity to turn America’s clock back to the good old days, when Carnegie, Vanderbilt and Rockefeller ran the country. Time for the return of the robber barons. The Roberts court didn’t rule on Citizens United v. FEC. Instead, both sides were asked to return in September for a “pre-session hearing on the validity of various electoral laws pertaining to the case.” Uh oh.

The Supreme Court wants to hear briefs on a case from 20 years ago: Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce. What’s the big deal about Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce? Not much, except that it set restrictions on campaign contributions by corporations, unions and other organizations. It’s the last thing holding corporations back from completely destroying democracy.

Shit was awesome 100 years ago. America was, as you may recall, a fantastic place of equality.

This is why Roberts and Alito were put on the bench. This is their calling. They showed their hand by clearly going out of their way to ask attorneys in Citizens United vs. FEC to prepare arguments on Austin. It’s the definition of judicial activism, something the right was supposed to be so very opposed to.

So, get ready to be fucked. We are about to live in a country where politicians will do whatever corporations want because Chevron or General Electric or Dow Chemical threatened to hand their opponent millions. As if it wasn’t already bad enough with lobbying, now it’s going to be out in the open and there will be nothing we can do to stop it.

Another one you can thank George Bush for.

FearTheReaper is a writer, actor and stand up comedian. Check back each Tuesday and Friday for more from FearTheReaper You may also enjoy his blog, Stop All Monsters.

Your left wing hypocracy knows no bounds. Take a break dude...

ALL politicians have "blood" on their hands...stop blaming everything on Bush and the right...it just sounds so lame and trite at this point...

There's a reasoned argument if ever there was one... 'man, this shit, again? Get over it.'

I think FTR's being pretty overly-reactionary here, the procedural process of how this case was handled does seem pretty strange, but could probably see Justice Kennedy siding with the liberal wing on this one. Of course, there's plenty of people on this board who know a lot more about the Supreme Court than me, but if this is all as strange as FTR's links make it out to be, at first blush I could maybe even say Justices Scalia or Thomas siding likewise ruling breaking ranks, leaving the decision 6 - 3.

thank you for that informative and well-researched argument. you've given us all a lot to think about.

FTR articles are generally extremely slanted, obviously, but this one stinks of one side of the story being told. Think what you want of Roberts and Alito's jurisprudence, to say that they base their decisions on some sort of nefarious plot to give corporations power is a bit more than far-fetched....but this is just my first coffee-of-the-morning knee-jerk reaction....I'll have to look into it.

Yeah, I think he was a little off in his tone & missed the mark. I didn't read this as FTR specifically saying this is the case they were hand-picked to manipulate into the desired result, just that the brand of far right ideology is less that of an extreme religious bent, & more of a free market/corporations can do no wrong bent & that belief influencing the Court in this case could have pretty disastrous results. Course, I don't even drink coffee & I haven't slept in forty-eight hours, so what the fuck do I know.

Hey Reaper, yeah you have spotted the actions and results, the real power behind the thrones is from those who control the money supply i.e. the International Monetary fund, Bank of settlements, Federal reserve corp. and others. Until we find a way to get to these folks we are like pigs trying control the farmers.

They're not coming to get you, not in your scariest libertarian fantasies. Money gives you a lot of freedom, whether its the personal freedom to retire early, advocate for causes, support charities, or influence public policy. This isn't about establishing the new order, this is wealthy & powerful individuals & corporations trying to make it as easy as possible for them to advocate for what it is important to them, in the case of corporations that's the simple: profit.

I love how a certain group of people like to label Corporations as greed. Let's go back in time, if you will, back to the years the Corporations were founded...

Ford: Yep. The pinnacle of corporate greed. Took a product that was exclusive to the ultra-rich and turned it into a commonly purchased product (of course, with the help of Americans, who manufactured these products).

Microsoft: Took computers from a government and large corporation-only, building-size, to a personally-owned system you can take anywhere (yet again, with the help Americans, who thought of the idea, went broke to push the product) - Who is the person who contributes more money to charity than the government of the United States? (which btw- contributes more money than most European countries.) That's right, that Rich a-hole Bill Gates. Greed. I know.

Bell: The company that took a product that didn't really achieve very much, and made it so big, that now we walk around with phones the size of soap-bars, and smaller. (Need I remind that it was hard working Americans who put together those inter-continental telephone lines that still exist today?)

Or all the insurance companies that created a service that allowed people to protect themselves (Again, employing Americans)

Or all the bankrupt airlines that made the United States one of get the most advanced countries in the world, able to transport mail, food, people, in hours and days instead of months or years?

Oh, I'll end with all the companies that harvest trees in order to build all the homes, fuel our schools, and business with paper used to teach, transfer, and notify people of crucial things? Whom also are the largest corporations that help the enviroment?

I know it's a gross summary of American Corporations (Sorry, Apple fanatics). Yes you get the nut-jobs who skim as much as they can from everyone. Can't stop that. Even in a socialist economy. (Russia anyone? the "capitalist" country that still owns the vast majority of their industries)

Shoot-- the best option you have in saving yourself is ANARCHY! Oh wait... That won't work either, because you'd probably end up dead from some a-hole, who normally would be kept in check by police from that same government that wants to sell out to corporations and their 'greed'.

Well, I can't leave it at that. Let's end it with. What country in the world is in every continent giving aide? The United States. Who contributes more than most of Europe? United States. Who is the one that is the main contibutor to the U.N.'s budget? Oh yeah, U.S. You. Me. US.

Them damn corrupt, greedy, Americans, and their corrupt, evil corporations.

Yawn. Gates stole the majority an operating system from someone else, cobbled the rest together and sold it to IBM, who was trying to bring their own computers to an already existing home computer market.

right, because the government NEVER bailed out the airlines before.

*cough* Enron *cough*
*cough* Mortgage and home lending businesses *cough*

So there are good corporations and bad corporations.. just like people?

Another argument that resembles skipping stones off the water's surface, thereby ignoring what lies beneath. Shallow logic and research at best.

The baseline fundamentals of capitalism are sound principals - if you can actually define baseline principals. The challenge with your assertion begins with the continual redefining of capitalism. In short, greed is too often substituted for what most of us who are practicing capitalists (investment banker here) believe is true capitalism.

Meeting an unmet market need (MSFT, FORD, etc) are all highly principled, important, and rewarding goals and deserve accolades, although your characterization of their strategies makes only vague reference to reality.

Flipped on its head, Cargill, Monsanto, and the firms whose efforts to artificially create demand for their products (corn, soy) and then integrate those products into every corner of the supply chain deserve little more than resentment. Contrary to your assertion, these firms are not "in the minority."

You managed to completely screw up the airline analogy with unprecedented naivety. Transportation was largely the jurisdiction of the railroads and they should have made the transition. Unfortunately, greed supplanted meeting the market need and railroads viewed their strength as real estate holdings (rights of way) versus providing transportation and they failed to make the transition. The replacement format - air travel and transportation was largely government subsidized at the outset and as most airlines failed to continue to address the needs of the market, they failed and once again were forced to rely on federal taxpayers to fund their businesses.

The point of this article, which appears to have escaped your reading comprehension is simple. capitalism can create opportunity, address market needs, and inspire change. Unchecked, left to simple greed, or facilitated through the political system, capitalism becomes something that is unhealthy for the market, the shareholders, and any country - even ours.

More than a little distorted. One great benefit of the Internet is that anybody can say anything regardless of it's relative lack of truth and accuracy.

Just like real life eh?

This is probably the most absurd of all the absurd articles reaper has written. He is confused on a variety of issues and is trying to lump them all together. This is utterly ridiculous mccarthyism at its worst.

1) The supreme court asked for briefings on Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce. They ask for these briefings all the time. THIS IS THE PRACTICE OF ALL LAW. You check for precidents in almost everything you do legally. There is no legitimate push to overturn it, they are checking a precident.

2) The original case Citizens United v. FEC is very dangerous, yes I know a group of people made a movie about your homegirl Hillary Clinton and you are soooo pissed off about it but the problem is if people are not allowed to make political movies, write books, go on talk shows etc. without coming under government regulations, there is no 1st ammendment. This is the basis of freedom of speech. The right of people to be able to speak out about politics, is the cornerstone of our freedom. GET A GRIP. Sorry it goes against your twisted views but the real failure in our system is that it HAD to go to the supreme court. Campaign finance is important but you cannot use it as a rationale to stamp out freedom of speech.

3) George Bush has put on 40 lbs, is wearing bermuda shorts on his livingroom couch. You really song like some socialist wacko still envoking his name. MOVE ON. Persue what is right from this point forward. GET OVER IT!! Obama has broken 60% of his campain promises, this with a Democrat controlled house and congress. You can't blame Bush for that, why are you not concerned with this?

4) Our government is for sale from top to bottom. Hell, Obama even sold his senate seat. If Exxon, Toyota or Sony require legislation it's going to make the news who they make contributions for or against. The bigger problems is the lobyists. There are 5 lobyists in DC for EVERY senator and representative. FIVE dude, five. This is a thriving business selling out every aspect of our lives. Obama pleged to stamp this out but he folded to corporate money. Why are you not writing about this? Obama pleged to stop it but the problem is all these senators who support him are in bed with the lobbyists so Obama chose to sacrifice what is best for our country so his cronies can continue to generate the best part of their income. You want something intelligent to write about, there you are...

These repeated left wing rants over and over are simply childish. Why is this shit even on Suicide Girls? You can read this same socialist propaganda except better written and researched on a thousand sites and blogs on the internet and TV. Chicks, fun, alternative cuture thats why 99.9% of the people are here, not for neomacartyism.

If you don't want FTR to keep writing articles, stop posting comments on them.

Logic. It does not belong here.

You are picking some unfortunate examples. The US airline industry as we know it became possible only through direct federal subsidies, it has been heavily subsidized throughout its' existence, and it continues to operate only because the Federal government continues to massively subsidize it, directly and indirectly.

The US auto industry similarly benefitted from heavy Federal subsidies, particularly in postwar boom America. Ford, GM etc could not have grown like they did without massive direct and indirect subsidies.

Bell System had a government-sanctioned near-monopoly for 50 years, another form of Federal subsidy.

There's much, much more, but you get the idea. Those companies and industries owe much of their size, success, reach and scale - sometimes their very continued existence, in fact - to Federal corporate welfare and policies that favored them over others.

Those policy choices and subsidies did not come out of a vacuum, and those companies did not succeed entirely on their own merits alone. Ford's brutal union-breaking (see "the battle of the overpass") and creepy social engineering of his employees (see Ford's "Social Department") are examples of the kind of by-any-means-necessary tactics used by big companies to ensure their growth and profits. Lobbying played even more of a role.


Ford, Bell, etc did fine and notable things as well, of course, but you can't get the whole picture without looking at what they did to get (and stay) there.

yes, corporations are greedy. they can't not be--most of them find that in order to grow beyond a certain point, they have to have public shareholders, and having public shareholders means submitting to due diligence. basically, corporations can either be greedy and succeed, or not be greedy and fail.

and that's a good thing. Gekko was right--greed is good. it's a powerful and consistent motivator, much more dependable than just about any other economic basis. but like any other power source in any other application, it has to be controlled and channeled. to make your car run, you don't just spray gasoline everywhere and light a match--you run the gas through the engine and ignite it in precise quantities at precise times, in order to get the most use out of the energy it provides you.

i don't necessarily think FTR's conspiracy theory is on the mark, but this move by Roberts does seem more akin to spraying gasoline everywhere than to internal combustion.

If you're not interested in current events, don't read the Current Events board. Go look at boobs instead.

When the same companies that got bailouts use it to lobby with, how can you not make that correlation?
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123267702062508887.html?mod=rss_whats_news_us

Microsoft: Perpetually embattled in anti-trust suits.

Bell: Also busted by anti-trust laws.

Wait. So my options are: Corporatocracy or Anarchy? I think Ill take my chances in the anarchist dreamscape.

don't buy into the false dichotomy. the best option is an economy in which corporations and individuals are free to pursue profit to the extent that their pursuit is not harmful to the economy overall, while remaining in line with the principles upon which our country was founded.

Get to the fucking point. I read 4 or 5 paragraphs and I'm done now because you didn't explain what is happening.

What I think this is missing is the fact that the Supreme court already sold out the country to corporations over a century ago. In any case, I'd appreciate a lawyer's opinion on this.