What are your thoughts of Obama's Speech?

What I do find fascinating is no one objecting to my calling it a decision by an activist court Originally Posted by discreetgent

i was giving you that one....its all about perspective my friend

i was giving you that one....its all about perspective my friend Originally Posted by nevergaveitathought

Yea if they are doing what you agree with they are then not activist... they are reasoned.

If nevergaveitathought side had their way we would put Standard Oil back together.

If nevergaveitathought side had their way we would put Standard Oil back together. Originally Posted by WTF

and with maybe sarah palin as its head? lol

dang wtf.... well ok maybe you're the resident satirist...

Yea if they are doing what you agree with they are then not activist... they are reasoned.

If nevergaveitathought side had their way we would put Standard Oil back together. Originally Posted by WTF

What makes you think it ever split up?

and with maybe sarah palin as its head? lol

... Originally Posted by nevergaveitathought

God that would be fun!

What makes you think it ever split up? Originally Posted by Happy Diver

LOL , Good point. Great book on that very subject but I can't recall the title.

Discreet gent, actually the only thing affected was since 1990, not quite 20 years. Originally Posted by nevergaveitathought

Not true. The reference to overturning 100 years of law refers to the Tillman Act of 1907 which was the first law to control corporate contributions to political campaigns.

What I do find fascinating is no one objecting to my calling it a decision by an activist court Originally Posted by discreetgent

No doubt about it. E.J. Dione had a column on this very point yesterday.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...av=hcmoduletmv

i'd comment but the continued "not true" when its true wears me out

Whether Alito's "Not True" whispering was accurate or not , has little to do with the audacity of the White House to be offended by someone else's potential "un-truth"! That was my point! To Hell with Protocol!

Giz

i wasnt referring to you mr giz

i wasnt referring to you mr giz Originally Posted by nevergaveitathought

No Problem... I realized that... I was poking fun at all the high-brow legal arguments, back & forth!

Giz

Whether you agree with the USSC ruling or not, here is an interesting write up about the doctrine of stare decisis, and the court's adherance to such.

http://www.rbs2.com/overrule.pdf

lol 37 pages; but worth the read

lol 37 pages; but worth the read Originally Posted by discreetgent

Yeah, I couldn't find the executive summary.

Then again, maybe that IS the executive summary.

The idea of controlling donations is a farce. When a candidate can simply turn off identification verification on a website and take in thousands (or more) $10 donations with absolutely no way of tracing who or what country they came from, when there are apparently no limits on what labour unions can donate , these so called controls are useless.

Just my opinion of course.

Regards,