Yay, Free $peech! Amurka Ha$ Be$t Democracy U Can Buy!

[Philly]

[Saz]

The argument focuses on quid pro quo. Tipping a cop is obviously a quid pro quo. Donating to a campaign is not. Sorry libs, looks like liberty is here to stay.

[Indy]

[Philly]

You have valid concerns Indy, but you're over simplifying. Donating to a political campaign is not the same as handing cash to a cop for him to pocket himself. It's illegal to give a politician money for personal use in this way just as it's illegal to bribe a cop.

For example if a gay man who wants to get married donates money to a gubernatorial candidate running on a platform that includes legalizing gay marriage in the state, is that a quid pro quo or just someone donating money to a cause he believes in?

[Saz]

[Indy]

Thus no quid pro quo. LOL.

So there's no way around getting money to candidates because there are "individual caps" in place?

And who knew the SCOTUS was backing you up, personally?

[Dylan]

I wouldn't be surprised if individual caps are removed shortly. The latest lines of logic lend themselves well to an argument that all campaign restrictions are illegal.

The ruling at issue isn't that big a deal compared to Citizens United. The next ruling that builds on those two precedents will blow Citizens United out of the water.

Hopefully the court comes to its senses before then.

[Philly]

Indy have you noticed that every time I comment on your clown pictures and facepalms you give a response but when I actually take the time to reply to your substantive posts you ignore it?

As much as you claim to want high minded discussions of these issues you seem to prefer the low hanging fruit.

[Saz]

[Indy]