If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Washington Post) NewsFlash US Supreme Court: The Constitution created a plutocracy, duh   (washingtonpost.com) divider line 78
    More: NewsFlash, Supreme Court, plutocracy  
•       •       •

18208 clicks; posted to Main » on 02 Apr 2014 at 12:07 PM (37 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»


Want to get NewsFlash notifications in email?

Voting Results (Funniest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

2014-04-02 10:47:22 AM  
11 votes:
Jesus Christ. These justices should dress like NASCAR drivers.
2014-04-02 12:13:22 PM  
6 votes:
Everybody loves buypartisanship.
2014-04-02 12:29:43 PM  
5 votes:

25.media.tumblr.com


"Git me! I'm giving out free speech!"



/out you five pixies go--through the door or out the window
2014-04-02 12:14:19 PM  
4 votes:
i.imgur.com

Well, it'll be the best government money can buy.
2014-04-02 12:12:09 PM  
4 votes:

what_now: Jesus Christ. These justices should dress like NASCAR drivers.


Fark that. Put'em in 8-inch heels and mini-skirts like the whores they are.
jbc [TotalFark]
2014-04-02 11:54:11 AM  
4 votes:

TuteTibiImperes: FTFA: Justice Clarence Thomas agreed with the outcome of the case, but wrote separately to say that he would have gone further and wiped away all contribution limits.

Justice Thomas desperately needs to go EABOD.


The entire bowl? Can't he just choke on Scalia's? His mouth is already there.
2014-04-02 11:06:55 AM  
4 votes:
more money equals better than

check mate, libtardatron 40k
2014-04-02 10:50:48 AM  
4 votes:

BunkoSquad: And yet if I offer to sell my vote for 100 bucks, I get in trouble.


It's because you aren't thinking big enough.  Steal a TV from Wal-Mart and you'll get thrown in the slammer.  Steal $100,000,000 from Medicare and you get elected as Governor of Florida.
2014-04-02 10:42:03 AM  
4 votes:

James!: It's not even a planet anymore.


Good. Because I don't want to live on this one anymore.
2014-04-02 12:36:50 PM  
3 votes:
The court has ruled, in its infinite wisdom, that the rich and poor alike are free to donate 3.6 million to political candidates.
2014-04-02 12:16:24 PM  
3 votes:
Hear that sound?

That's the sound of 535 people instantly and simultaneously achieving sexual release.  Cleanup in the aisle please!
2014-04-02 11:51:31 AM  
3 votes:
Excellent to see that they are stripping down the campaign contribution laws.  I spent my money well.
2014-04-02 11:17:40 AM  
3 votes:

James!: That's one way to get rich people to plow their money back into the economy.


It is rather amusing watching a congresscritter spit out a corporate dick to accuse the corporation of wrong-doing, though
2014-04-02 11:14:48 AM  
3 votes:
That's one way to get rich people to plow their money back into the economy.
2014-04-02 10:48:44 AM  
3 votes:
And yet if I offer to sell my vote for 100 bucks, I get in trouble.
2014-04-02 06:06:24 PM  
2 votes:

R.A.Danny: dr_blasto: R.A.Danny: ciberido: Road Rash: You would think Soros, Bloomberg, the unions, etc., would be happy about this.

You MIGHT think that, if you were rather dim.

Or is this an attempt to resurrect that old "liberal elite" claptrap?

Are you saying Bloomberg doesn't like to use his money to get his way?

He was a Republican. I don't think he qualifies as "liberal elite" other than the fact that his weirdo nanny state shiat is often and incorrectly associated with leftism and not the regular old fascism he actually represents.

He should be wearing a tutu in the Tenderloin district he's so liberal.


Ha. OK.

He's more the conservative British nanny type.
htmlimg3.scribdassets.com
2014-04-02 02:38:35 PM  
2 votes:
Oh hai guys!

Is there a problem here?

So big deal if there's lots of money on politics. The voters are smart enough to vote for their best interests, right?
2014-04-02 12:40:24 PM  
2 votes:
Meh, bribery is for the little people.  Once you get into the millions it counts as free speech.
2014-04-02 12:27:25 PM  
2 votes:

MaudlinMutantMollusk: Lemme guess... 5-4?

/Koch suckers


Yes. Somebody needs to stop those Koch Bros from spending so much money, I mean just look at this list of top donors and how the Koch Bros insidiously don't even make the top 25:

scontent-a-iad.xx.fbcdn.net
2014-04-02 12:21:19 PM  
2 votes:
media.desura.com
2014-04-02 12:20:28 PM  
2 votes:
How long 'til the Republican Party breaks up into two groups: the Adelson Party, and the Koch Party?
2014-04-02 12:17:04 PM  
2 votes:
This is what Jesus would want.
2014-04-02 12:14:17 PM  
2 votes:
AND a kakistocracy.
2014-04-02 12:13:23 PM  
2 votes:
John Roberts, 2012: I have given you Obamacare...
John Roberts, 2014: ...if you can keep it.
2014-04-02 11:00:36 AM  
2 votes:

i.imgur.comi.imgur.comi.imgur.com

 

i.imgur.comi.imgur.comi.imgur.com

 

i.imgur.comi.imgur.comi.imgur.com

2014-04-02 10:58:15 AM  
2 votes:

Irving Maimway: FML.

Well, there's just no pretending this is a republic anymore is there?


Well, maybe the Ferenghi republic
2014-04-02 10:36:48 AM  
2 votes:
It's not even a planet anymore.
2014-04-02 07:52:52 PM  
1 votes:

Psycat: I know of the type of people of whom you speak.  I call them "trailer-park objectivists"


Jesus, I didn't know there was an actual name fro the psychosis
2014-04-02 05:50:23 PM  
1 votes:
i1.ytimg.com
2014-04-02 04:25:36 PM  
1 votes:

Phinn: Loadmaster: sendtodave: How will people with no money or power change the world?

Loadmaster: People with no power or money by definition cannot change the world.
That's why representative forms of government were invented. In most instances, by forceful revolution.

sendtodave: I guess we operate under the pretense that our representatives actually represent our interests, and not their own.

Smart voters vote for representatives whose interests come closest to their own interests.

Politics is a contest of interests masquerading as a contest of principles.

I can't believe the Prog butthurt on display today. It's sweet to drink in the tears, but kind of sad at the same time -- emotional children who sincerely believe the whole "voting" story about "representatives" and "democracy."

It's like seeing a 10 year-old learning there's no Santa.


2.bp.blogspot.com

= you
2014-04-02 03:36:08 PM  
1 votes:

KellyX: These people are going to be shocked and question why them, on the day they're all put up against the wall.


And, let's see what those most affected by this assault on democracy have to say:


"SHHHHHH! BE QUIET!!!! DANCING WITH THE STARS IS ON!!!!!"
2014-04-02 02:29:01 PM  
1 votes:
Yeah, "campaign contributions." If you're foolish enough to believe even half that money doesn't mysteriously disappear somewhere, then you're foolish enough to believe money doesn't create corruption like "Honorable" Justice Roberts.

Sorry, but this is a national security threat more than anything else. There's literally nothing stopping multinational Billionaires from buying any politicians they want now. Sure, you have to call it "campaign spending" but since all politicians are always campaigning and now have enough money to freespeech the people responsible for overseeing whether or not they're spending it on their campaign, it's all a bit moot, now isn't it?

The Justice here just said that basically money is more important than anything else. The acquisition of wealth is now your ticket to actual representation. Woe to those who can't freespeech their way out of all the problems, just like Mexico!

Sounds like Bribery on the wide-scale just became legal folks. If a cop doesn't accept your freespeech you can now sue him for arresting you. That wad of cash you handed him was the same thing as you singing a song about Jesus, or asking for your lawyer. You can't discriminate against people for expressing their beliefs with huge sums of money.
2014-04-02 01:55:38 PM  
1 votes:

Teiritzamna: <smart things>


Goddammit, I'm pissed right now. DONT MAKE ME LIKE YOU!!
2014-04-02 01:53:47 PM  
1 votes:

DamnYankees: It is amazing that in the same week you have GOP Presidential candidates all traveling to Las Vegas to bow and kiss the ring of a mega-donor in a rather sickening display of groveling, the USSC can make this decision. Pretty insane.


To go a little off the beaten path, I always wonder what Jabba's wife thinks as he undresses to climb into bed at night?

unitedrepublic.org
2014-04-02 01:30:59 PM  
1 votes:

Friction8r: The FECKLESS crowd has massive butthurt in this thread. As a public service reminder, FECKLESS is an acronym:

Fark
Echo
Chamber of
Kooky
Liberals
Espousing
Stupid
Shiat.

/welcome


img.fark.net
2014-04-02 01:30:04 PM  
1 votes:

FTDA: TuteTibiImperes: FTFA: Justice Clarence Thomas agreed with the outcome of the case, but wrote separately to say that he would have gone further and wiped away all contribution limits.

Justice Thomas desperately needs to go EABOD.

Agreed.

/I'm a Moderate Republican.


i60.tinypic.com
2014-04-02 01:27:39 PM  
1 votes:
The FECKLESS crowd has massive butthurt in this thread. As a public service reminder, FECKLESS is an acronym:

Fark
Echo
Chamber of
Kooky
Liberals
Espousing
Stupid
Shiat.

/welcome
2014-04-02 12:57:27 PM  
1 votes:

MattStafford: I love playing Devil's Advocate on these kinds of things, but I seriously have nothing.  Constitutionally, it makes sense, but trying to come up with a reason that this particular practice should be allowed outside of "constitution sez so" is a pretty tough task.


Shouldn't a court ruling on constitutionality be based only on "constitution sez so"?
2014-04-02 12:53:17 PM  
1 votes:

FlashHarry: In 2012,sixty percent of the Super PAC money donated by individuals came from just 91 people, and 97 percent came from just 1,900 donors. The total amount that PACs raised from small donors of $200 or less is roughly equivalent to the amount given by just 629 "megadonors," who each contributed $100,000 or more.


Understand this is not about the 1% controlling elections, it is about the .01% controlling elections.
2014-04-02 12:46:43 PM  
1 votes:
img3.wikia.nocookie.net

Plutocracy? I'm not taking anymore orders from a dog. Last time I did, I lost my job at the post office and some guy named Newman stole my mail bag.
2014-04-02 12:46:20 PM  
1 votes:

MaudlinMutantMollusk: Lemme guess... 5-4?

/Koch suckers


Clarence Thomas would eagerly overturn the 13th Amendment if given a chance, and then sing a happy song as he's lead off in chains to work in Masshuh David Koch's plantations.
2014-04-02 12:42:40 PM  
1 votes:

SphericalTime: MaudlinMutantMollusk: Lemme guess... 5-4?

/Koch suckers

I presume.  I only see 4 on the opinion, but there has to be one more.


Thomas concurred with some inane Thomas theory about property rights.
2014-04-02 12:37:47 PM  
1 votes:

SilentStrider: And yet people laugh at Occupy for being pissed off about the politic system.


Just the idiots and partisans.  Everyone else seems to have a basic understanding that only movement politics is capable of producing systemic change in this country.
2014-04-02 12:36:47 PM  
1 votes:

AliceBToklasLives: But it is insane to claim that there is some kind of equivalence between the $1,000 I could spend to express my free speech and the $50,000,000 that George Soros

  could spend to express his free speech.


So it's more of an "it's not faaaaaaaaaaair" argument.
.
2014-04-02 12:36:33 PM  
1 votes:

EyeballKid: How long 'til the Republican Party breaks up into two groups: the Adelson Party, and the Koch Party?


Sometime around the 2000 election.
2014-04-02 12:36:25 PM  
1 votes:

chapman: The second half:


Weird. Sheldon Adelson isn't on that list at ALL, yet he has confirmed donating nearly 90 MILLION just in one year

And you are claiming the Kochs haven't donated even 30 million?

Like I said, you seem to be counting on people being idiots, like you...
2014-04-02 12:36:10 PM  
1 votes:

MaudlinMutantMollusk: MaudlinMutantMollusk: James!: That's one way to get rich people to plow their money back into the economy.

It is rather amusing watching a congresscritter spit out a corporate dick to accuse the corporation of wrong-doing, though

Well that was just wrong


Nope.
i.qkme.me
2014-04-02 12:35:44 PM  
1 votes:
Well shiat

/on reflection and further reading, this is less dire than I originally thought
//Still, well shiat
2014-04-02 12:34:50 PM  
1 votes:

keylock71: Absolutely disgusting... But not surprising. We've been a Plutocracy with a thin façade of Democracy for a long time now.


Yes... Since around 1776.
2014-04-02 12:32:31 PM  
1 votes:

chapman: Yes. Somebody needs to stop those Koch Bros from spending so much money, I mean just look at this list of top donors and how the Koch Bros insidiously don't even make the top 25:


It's almost... ALMOST like you don't understand reporting laws.

ALMOST. I'm betting you do know about unreported political funding, but hope no one calls you on it.
2014-04-02 12:28:18 PM  
1 votes:
de·moc·ra·cy
/diˈmäkrəsē/
noun: democracy
    1.  a system of government by the affluent population or all the eligible corporate entities of a state, typically through purchased representatives.
2014-04-02 12:27:51 PM  
1 votes:
A plutocracy?  That's goofy!
2014-04-02 12:25:47 PM  
1 votes:
Can we start a fund to bribe the SCOTUS and Congress? Apparently, bribery is the only way to get justice anymore.

I figure 541 members of Congress plus 9 members of the SCOTUS...550 times...let's see, they're all worth about $1 on a good day...so $550 should buy me some representation in Washington DC.

So where do I send my check?
2014-04-02 12:25:28 PM  
1 votes:
If Sheldon Adelson wants to buy a president, he should have the right to have a primary so that he can put his hundred million behind the candidate that will at least get the nomination before losing to Hillary in 2014.
2014-04-02 12:24:46 PM  
1 votes:

Serious Black: zedster: Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts: 'We have made clear that Congress may not regulate campaign contributions to protect against corruption'

Are you goddamn serious? That was part of the opinion?


Well sure, it sounds silly when you say it out loud.
2014-04-02 12:22:58 PM  
1 votes:

vudukungfu: How long until there is an American Al Quaeda party?American Taliban party?


What? You mean one full of religious fundamentalists who want America's government destroyed?


I'm pretty sure that already exists.
2014-04-02 12:21:22 PM  
1 votes:
Don't worry! Your individual vote will take care of all the problems.
2014-04-02 12:20:00 PM  
1 votes:
Spending money is freedom of speech. More money = more freedom. If you hate this, you hate America, citizen. Having no money will means you are an enemy of the state. You will be placed under the custody of Carl's Jr.
2014-04-02 12:19:27 PM  
1 votes:

Princess Ryans Knickers: wait till it backfires like Citizens United and the Democratics take the House due to this ruling


I see what you did there.
2014-04-02 12:18:41 PM  
1 votes:
This is SO not good.

This next election cycle is going to be clown shoes.
2014-04-02 12:17:57 PM  
1 votes:
i290.photobucket.com

This business will get out of control. It will get out of control, and we will be lucky to live through it.
2014-04-02 12:17:33 PM  
1 votes:
Suck it, libs!

/had to be said
2014-04-02 12:16:16 PM  
1 votes:

d23: FarkedOver: There needs to be an campaign contribution amendment if you want to completely circumvent the supreme court.

Someone smarter than I need to figure out how we can have a constitutional convention without the asshole politicians being involved.


Dare to dream! :(
d23 [TotalFark]
2014-04-02 12:13:02 PM  
1 votes:

Misch: Well, at least we can equate political donations with flag burning, funeral protests and Nazi parades.


How can we equate political bribery to gay sex?  People would actually pay attention then...
2014-04-02 12:11:54 PM  
1 votes:
Well, at least we can equate political donations with flag burning, funeral protests and Nazi parades.
2014-04-02 12:10:21 PM  
1 votes:
(>ლ)
2014-04-02 12:10:20 PM  
1 votes:
The only real difference this makes is that it simplifies the network of shell organizations the Kochs have to funnel the money through.
2014-04-02 12:10:01 PM  
1 votes:
LOL!

That's not even a planet anymore, duh!
2014-04-02 12:04:04 PM  
1 votes:

MaudlinMutantMollusk: Lemme guess... 5-4?

SphericalTime: I presume. I only see 4 on the opinion, but there has to be one more.

TuteTibiImperes: Yup, along the usual lines


It's more of a 1-4-4 ruling, with Justice Thomas thinking the other conservatives are too faint-hearted.
2014-04-02 11:27:25 AM  
1 votes:

somedude210: ....

well then, I can't wait to see just how expensive 2014 is going to be then....

/on the bright side, we have proven that money doesn't necessarily buy an election
//see 2012


It won't buy you the election, but it will buy you a chance at winning the election. To quote Robert Shrum, "You don't need the most money, but you do need enough."
2014-04-02 11:21:25 AM  
1 votes:

somedude210: James!: That's one way to get rich people to plow their money back into the economy.

if only the people they donated too would actually buy shiat in mass amounts and not horde it all


Sure, they pay telemarketers to do push polling.  They pay for print, TV and radio adds.  They pay for bloggers to update their sucky blogs. They hire shiatty statisticians and half retarded pundits.  Security staff at rallies and expensive dinners.

They hire some of the worst people in the world by the bucket full!
2014-04-02 11:18:28 AM  
1 votes:

MaudlinMutantMollusk: James!: That's one way to get rich people to plow their money back into the economy.

It is rather amusing watching a congresscritter spit out a corporate dick to accuse the corporation of wrong-doing, though


Well that was just wrong

/thread fail... sorry
2014-04-02 11:01:33 AM  
1 votes:
Everyone has free speech. The rich just have more of it and the ability to give to people in charge of regulating them.
2014-04-02 10:57:43 AM  
1 votes:

Marcus Aurelius: John Roberts just said that money doesn't corrupt politics.

He sounds utterly corrupt.


He could just be an idiot.
2014-04-02 10:50:22 AM  
1 votes:

SphericalTime: Serious Black: zedster: Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts: 'We have made clear that Congress may not regulate campaign contributions to protect against corruption'

Are you goddamn serious? That was part of the opinion?


"The government has a strong interest, no less critical to our democratic system, in combatting corruption and its appearance," Roberts wrote. "We have, however, held that this interest must be limited to a specific kind of corruption - quid pro quo corruption - in order to ensure that the government's efforts do not have the effect of restricting the First Amendment right of citizens to choose who shall govern them."


Do I have a First Amendment right to kick John Roberts in the groin whilst wearing a steel-toed boot?
2014-04-02 10:48:08 AM  
1 votes:
FTFA: Justice Clarence Thomas agreed with the outcome of the case, but wrote separately to say that he would have gone further and wiped away all contribution limits.

Justice Thomas desperately needs to go EABOD.
2014-04-02 10:47:44 AM  
1 votes:

SphericalTime: We need a clear constitutional amendment, I guess.  Which groups are already working on this?  The ACLU?


This country was unable to get child labor or equal rights amendments passed, there's no chance of an amendment on this passing. Not with everyone in Congress potentially having the chance to profit from this ruling.
2014-04-02 10:42:22 AM  
1 votes:
Lemme guess... 5-4?

/Koch suckers
 
Displayed 78 of 78 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


Report