A surprise decision by the High Court. What does it mean? For starters, fairer elections.

190 share

<<< Add these names to the list within this post,  and you will agree,  that the Supreme Court did the right thing   . . . .    period. 

Editor's notes:  as you can see from looking at "Discussion," (scroll down and see our "subject article" below "Editor's notes") the interest level for this news lede was/is very high.  What does it mean?

Well,  for starters,  it means that Big Money will be an equal partner for the GOP just as it has been for the Democrats.  No more will the Dems have an advantage over the GOP in collecting and reporting contributions to its cause.

In 2008,  H Obama "bundled" nearly half a billion dollars in $200/$250 contributions,  much of it from unnamed sources outside this country,  and refused to give a listing of who made these donations.  While McCain played the "good guy," in losing the election for us Conservatives, and named ALL of his donors,  even the smaller gifts,  Obama used the law to hide those contributions,  leaving open the probability that the half billion dollars were laundered to appear as $200 donations.  In that campaign,  McCain raised $500 million,  a record total,  but Obama took in more than $860 million and has never stopped his campaign for political offerings.  In fact,  he actually sees this as more his job,  than all the duties he has a "president."

 Before Citizens United  (Jan 25 of 2010),  the first High Court decision allowing corporations to be treated as free men within the American political system . . .  before Citizens United and the McCutcheon v FEC ruling,  today,  the Socialist run unions of America, including teacher and industrial unions, coupled with millions of dollars in free media advertisements,  supplied by NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN,  MSNBC and mega organizations such as Yahoo, Google and Facebook,   owned the world on laundered, campaign money and excessive/unlimited donations.  The Dems are only crying because the High Court has balanced the power of big money.  In terms of money,  the world belongs to both parties,  now,  and for the first time in decades.  

Politics have not favored the "little guy" for as long as I can remember.  When the Dems cry,  "The rich now rule,"  they are only upset because "the rich" they are talking about,  are not Democrats.  The national elections belong to the national parties.  The midterms,  influenced by big money,  still belong to the "common man."  This decision,  by the Supremes',  does not change that political reality,  but balances the books with concern to the previous and historically unfair "status quo" that favored the Socialist Dems.

Understand this,  they hate a fair fight.  

In a parting note,  you should know that this Administration of  Lies,  has lost a record 60% of its High Court appearances,  THAT is how out of touch this Administration is with regard to the US Constitution.  Other Executive appearances,  Democrat as well as Republican,  have seen a 70% win record in the High Court;  Obama is closer to a 40% victory rate.

Subject article:

 Adam Liptak / New York Times:

Supreme Court Strikes Down Aggregate Limits on Federal Campaign Contributions  —  WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Wednesday issued a major campaign finance decision, striking down limits on federal campaign contributions for the first time.  The ruling, issued near the start of a campaign season …

+

Discussion: Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, Watchdog.org, Salon, The Mischiefs of Faction,SCOTUSblog, Washington Times, Talking Points Memo, Bloomberg View, American Prospect, The Other McCain, The Moderate Voice, The Daily Banter, Firedoglake, USA Today, neo-neocon, his vorpal sword,Republic 3.0, Philly.com, Towleroad News #gay, Mashable, Hit & Run, Althouse, Washington Monthly,Corrente, TomDispatch.com, Hinterland Gazette and Balloon Juice
_________________

Related:  

Update (4/3/2014):   Fox News reports that the Center for Responsive Politics estimates that 97 percent of political contributions from the nation’s leader trial lawyers went to Democrats. Rather than advocating for individuals,  as the ambulance chaser ads suggest,  trial lawyers have taken on the role of “protector” of corporations and insurance companies against any significant tort reform. 

In 2010, the American Association for Justice,  one of several trial lawyer combines,  donated 2.48 million to various Democrat candidates.  Add this group ("trial lawyers") to the under-reported totals donated into Democrat coffers.