The Supreme Court (with 2 new Bushies added to it) has decided that corporations, businesses and private interest groups can now run their own smear ads against a candidate as long as they don't specifically say not to vote for that candidate:
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/06/25/campaign.finance/index.html
Anyone want to take a guess at which candidate will get hit by the pharmaceutical companies and health insurance mafia?
Anyone else ashamed that the Supreme Court would advocate even more corporate mud-slinging added to our politics this year?
2007-12-13 17:16:19 · 13 answers · asked by rabble rouser 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
what do u mean 2 new bushies? i thought they already appointed 4...i'm just wondering what happens if/when 5 or more justices of the SC (meant to determin constitutionality of bills or cases) are appointed by someone who has 0 respect for the constitution in the first place...
dude common, Hilldog isn't a commie not even close...communism is ANTI capitolism...she's a corporate lap dog to the bitter end.
2007-12-13 17:19:42 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 2⤋
Well, since trial lawyers are the largest political campaign donar interest group.
Who donate six times more than the oil industry, pharmacutical industry or insurance industry do each year.
And who donate to democratic candiates 80% of the time.
Who cares ?
Which presidential candiates recieve the most from industry?:
Insurance - Christopher J. Dodd (D) $713,000
Trial Lawyers - Hillary Clinton (D) $9,500,000
Oil industry - Rudolph W. Giuliani (R) $545,000
Pharmaceutical - Hillary Clinton (D) $269,000
TV and Music - Barack Obama (D) $2,200,000
Securites - Hillary Clinton (D) $4,700,000
Real estate - hillary clinton (D) $3,900,000
So it seems like, we know who will get hit with those negative ads.
And it sure isn't gonna be Democratic candiates.
Next time, you might wanna actually look at which partires, industry gives money to, before ya post.
2007-12-13 17:57:37 · answer #2 · answered by jeeper_peeper321 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
If you had read your own article you would have seen that it said it was a defeat for the Bush administration's campaign reform legislation! Hillary is one of the biggest recipients from pharmaceutical companies of all the candidates!
2007-12-13 23:40:27 · answer #3 · answered by elaine 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Anyone want to take a guess at which candidate will get hit by the labor union mafia?
According to the linked CNN report, unions are affected by this just as corporations are... but I notice you don't mention that?
Are smear ads acceptable, as long as they are directed against Republicans?
2007-12-13 18:06:35 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
We shouldn't be so sure that the pharmaceutical and health care people will be talking smack about Hillary. Her plan is the only one that actually has incentives for those industries. It was designed that way to reduce the lobbying against it specifically by those groups. They may be more inclined to go after Edward's and Obama's plans, who really jam it to them.
2007-12-13 17:32:16 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
No. She has never even sat as a Judge in any kind of court. I am unaware of her pursuing any kind of advance studies in Constitutional law. She has even never argued a case before any State Supreme Court much less the high Court. She is massively unqualified.
2016-05-23 12:07:49 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well I don't like the mud slinging. However, where in the U.S. Constitution does the Federal government have the power to restrict free speech of any person or group?
Vote for Ron Paul not a Marxist like Hillary. And why do Dems like her anyway? She is working really hard to ship out jobs to India. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cLNOSGM2jK4
Hillary will betray the Democrats much like Bush betrayed the Republicans. She'll will do exactly what Bush has been doing. Watch her.
2007-12-13 17:21:46 · answer #7 · answered by mikearion 4 · 3⤊ 2⤋
Hillary Clinton has the most Corporate donors out of all of the democratic candidates.
2007-12-13 17:19:45 · answer #8 · answered by ddd 1 · 5⤊ 0⤋
Yes, the Supremes are corrupting the concept of "free speech," and they are making it easier for special interests to buy candidates and offices. Hillary will get hurt, but so will any other Democratic candidate.
2007-12-13 18:13:50 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
They were just trying to cut down the huge number of anti smear campaigns they have to handle by giving the green light for a "free for all". Hehe!
2007-12-13 17:24:42 · answer #10 · answered by Din2600 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋