Yeah, I keep reading that as “Megaboners”
Common Dreams - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)
Information for Common Dreams:
MBFC: Left - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
Wikipedia about this sourceSearch topics on Ground.News
They always give these draconian laws positive sounding names. Also, all that disposable money could’ve be used for social programs through taxation
What law are you referring to?
They appear to be mistaking the shorthand for the Supreme Court ruling to be the name of a law. In fairness, bills do often have overly patriotic names that hide their paradoxical purposes.
The ministry of Truth would never lie! It’s right there in the name!
Well the same principle is at play here, since Citizens United is a deceitful name for an astroturfed, billionaire-funded organization that had absolutely no involvement from ordinary citizens.
Fuck Citizens United.
Just gonna leave this here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_(organization)
The current president, David Bossie… served in executive positions for President Donald Trump’s and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s reelection campaigns.
As I always say;
The rivers of ruin run deep.More swampy than a river imo
”Gentlemen, this is democracy manifest…”
~hysterical laughter with a backing track of Ominous Latin Chanting~
This is how we get rid of the Deep State! Thank you Trump’s Supreme Court (who has been doing the Same Things as Citizen United but for our OTHER Rights!)!
Republicans don’t want to get rid of it because it helps them against Democrats. Democrats don’t want to get rid of it because it helps them lock out progressives. We’re stuck with it.
How would the Democrats “get rid of” a supreme court decision?
Proponents of which party brought the case? Appointees of which party were in the deciding majority on the court?
How would the Democrats “get rid of” a supreme court decision?
Stacking the courts and bringing another case. Or an amendment.
So like I said, we’re stuck with it.
SCOTUS does not need a case to reverse itself or review a law. In fact there’re startlingly few rules around SCOTUS.
add more justices
Imagine this money put into public healthcare…
Every drop helps, but the US spends around $4.5 trillion annually on healthcare. If we reverted to single-payer, cut out the middle-man multi-pipeline network of private insurers thereby also lowering administrative overhead that last I checked was around 30%… We would likely achieve what most other nations are achieving at half the per-capita cost we pay now.
y’all come on now, just cause they donated a couple billion bucks does not mean their opinion matters more than an average citizen does it?
After a certain point, they’re just going to cut out the middle-man and say Money = Votes and allow you to bid or hold shares in the office of the President.
Citizens United and SpeechNow fucked us. Until these are overturned, along with the Electoral College and FPTP abolished, dark days are ahead for our Democracy.
At which point we the people would be morally and legally obligated to make that office uninhabitable.
There is always an answer. Just not always a civilized one.
It’s funny people believe before citizens united that money didnt run politics. America is an oligarchy ,has been my entire life, and always will be. It’s not a bad system if you learn about it. Lots of opportunities if you are willing.
America is an oligarchy ,has been my entire life, and always will be.
Are you over 200 years old? government used to break up monopolies. citizens united probably wasn’t the beginning but it sure did streamline the corruption and legalize the purchase of politicians. Anyways, normalizing apathy probably isn’t going to help the situation.
The entire point of the law they struck down was to take money out of politics. Yes we know money has been a problem.
So let’s see Kamala’s plan to end this bullshit… Obviously Trump wouldn’t, but Kamala might if we push enough
Lmao this take that Kamala is somehow immune to the realities of our political financing structures makes no sense to me
Not immune, and not calling for her to abstain… But she could easily say she wants to change the system and how. It’s not even controversial and would get her plenty of points from the left to the center.
Is one of them Israel and other foreign governments? Also Pfizer?
They’re all begging for the guillotine. Why keep them waiting?
Pretty sure I might be on this list. Gave $20 not too long ago, so I’m about to buy some laws.
