In a message dated 3/30/2010 9:08:52 P.M. Central Daylight Time,
[log in to unmask] writes:
Many on
this list will find this of interest.--Tom
====================================================
Today we
resume with our 7th installment in the series body slamming
the Supreme
Court decision declaring our country the United
Trans-Global Corporations
of America.
But first, the new Independent Voters movement is growing
quickly.
The Facebook page (which anyone can read, even without a Facebook
account) has over 3,000 fans already, in just the first week. Most of
all we need MAXIMUM participation from our progressive political
friends on Facebook so our voices will be heard here. So especially
if
you are on Facebook already please go there and become a fan.
[Facebook] Independent Voters page:
http://www.facebook.com/Independent.Voters
We have also set up a
fabulous new inter-navigation resource and we
need you to submit ALL your
activist links on ANY site anywhere,
independent candidate sites, issue
advocacy sites, existing third
party sites, bring it all. Just click on
the Hub tab on the page
above, and get the code for the linking button and
you will
automatically get a listing on the new hub. If you want to
associate
a special description for your link submit the simple form on
that
page.
And we are now also streaming the posts (at least the
first 140
chars) from the new Independent Voters page to Twitter as well.
Follow this Twitter account and we will AUTOMATICALLY follow you back
to boost your own followers, and you can participate in the
discussion
this way:
@iVoters
As we mobilize long term against the
Supreme Court outrage, we are
focused on distributing as many of the
"Corporations Are NOT The
People" bumper stickers as possible, with over
15,000 out the door so
far (mostly entirely for free), and we have shipped
all the bulk
packs requested too.
To get a free bumper sticker (if
you haven't requested yours yet)
just submit this page. If you can make a
donation of course this is
what makes it possible for us to send free
bumper stickers to those
who cannot make a donation right now.
Free Supreme Court Bumper Sticker:
http://www.peaceteam.net/bumper_stickers.php
For those who want to
organize locally, packs of 25, 50 and 100 are
available for a modest price
(just enough to keep the initiative
going) at
Bulk Supreme Court
Bumper Stickers:
http://www.peaceteam.net/bumper_stickers_bulk.php
OK, so here we go again. A Supreme Court decision is supposed to be
the words straight from the horse's mouth. But the one in the
Corporations United case calls into question which end of the horse
it
came from.
Where we last left our villains on the Supreme Court we
were talking
about how Kennedy, besides his own fact finding errors, had
built his
entire decision on misreading the actual holdings of the cases
he was
citing, relying instead on dissents (often his own) and dicta
(stray
language) which are NOT supposed to take precedence.
Central to Kennedy's specious analysis is his quotation OUT of
context (opinion at p. 30) of this language from the Belloti decision
putatively rejecting
"the proposition that speech that OTHERWISE
would be within the
protection of the First Amendment loses that
protection simply
because its source is a corporation."
Here WE
emphasize the word "otherwise" in this passage because it is
pivotal and
the only one that really matters. Kennedy would read this
rejection, of
the hypothetical proposition stated, as a declaration
that corporations
have unlimited and ABSOLUTE First Amendment free
speech rights. The
Belloti decision held NO such thing. It says here
only that corporations
have SOME free speech rights, subject to other
limitations provided
elsewhere.
And indeed elsewhere in the Belloti decision it in fact
expressly
limited itself to the issue of whether corporations can
participate
in a debate on POLICY issues in public discourse. The issue of
whether corporations can without any regulation or restriction
participate in CANDIDATE advocacy, in particular within 30 days of an
election, as per the statute overturned by Kennedy's outlaw decision,
by Kennedy's own admission (opinion p. 31) the Belloti decision did
NOT "address".
Here's what Belloti actually says about the
intended scope of its
holding.
"... our consideration of a
corporation's right to speak on issue of
general public interest implies
no comparable right in the quite
different context of participation in a
political campaign for
election to public office." [435 US at 788, n. 26.]
Whoop, there it is, as they say in the legal biz. The Belloti
decision concerned only whether a corporation could weigh in on the
merits of a referendum on a public policy issue. To explode that into
a destruction of all reasonable restraints on untoward corporate
influence on candidate elections is for Kennedy to play terrorist
with
our entire infrastructure of jurisprudence.
All this may have escaped
Kennedy's horse blindered attention in
arriving at his perverse result,
but it sure did not escape Justice
Stevens, who precisely pointed all this
out in his dissent at p. 52.
Nobody disputes that corporations have at
least some First Amendment
rights. Otherwise corporate advertising in ALL
forms would be banned.
But here Kennedy engages in a unilateral refusal to
read the words in
the Belloti decision for what they actually say.
In short, Belloti EXPRESSLY precluded the interpretation Kennedy
would give it. This is beyond reckless, it is beyond irresponsible,
it
is beyond dishonest, it is Orwellian, and coming from the mouth of
a
Supreme Court justice ... it is criminal.
Likewise, in his deliberate
misapplication of the Buckley case
Kennedy's citation of vague language
disapproving of restricting "the
speech of some elements of our society in
order to enhance the
relative voice of others" is no more availing
(opinion p. 33) to
decide an issue he HIMSELF admits Buckley did not
"consider" (opinion
p. 29).
This is not about seeking to "enhance"
the voice of citizens
vis-a-vis corporations. It is exactly because
corporations have
overwhelmingly so much more financial power RELATIVE to
individual
citizens that Congress has passed reasonable regulations on
them. And
over the decades the Courts have affirmed these regulations over
and
over, to keep the voice of actual citizens from being drowned out,
which regulations Kennedy now so unrighteously overturns.
Seven
parts in this series already, and are we done yet ripping this
heinous
decision to legal shreds? Not even close. Next up in this
series, the drop
kick hypocrisy of Kennedy's First Amendment
absolutism as applied on
behalf of corporations only.
Please take action NOW, so we can win all
victories that are supposed
to be ours, and forward this alert as widely
as possible.
If you would like to get alerts like these, you can do so
at
http://www.millionfaxmarch.com/in.htm
Or if you want to cease
receiving our messages, just use the function
at
http://www.millionfaxmarch.com/out.htm
usalone386b:364698