Liberals Fume over Supreme Court Campaign Finance Ruling

Liberals are absolutely up in arms about a 5-4 Supreme Court decision that said that limits on the total amount of money that individuals can give to candidates, political parties and political action committees are unconstitutional. The ruling removes the cap on contributions from individuals, which was set at $123,200 for 2014, but does not lift limits on individual contributions for president or for Congress, which are $2,600 per election.

Chief justice John Roberts wrote about the ruling in McCutcheon v. FEC, 12-536, “Money in politics may at times seem repugnant to some, but so too does much of what the First Amendment vigorously protects. If the First Amendment protects flag burning, funeral protests and Nazi parades – despite the profound offense such spectacles cause – it surely protects political campaign speech despite popular opinion.”

Spending limits “intrude without justification on a citizen’s ability to exercise ‘the most fundamental First Amendment activities,”‘ Roberts wrote. Conservative associate justice Clarence Thomas agreed and then went further in a separate opinion that all campaign contribution limits should be eliminated.

Liberal justice Stephen Breyer, who disagreed with the ruling, wrote that the decision “eviscerates our nation’s campaign finance laws.” The very liberal said the decision “has seriously threatened our democracy by allowing ultra-rich individuals like Shaun McCutcheon and the Koch brothers to effectively buy as many members of Congress as their bank accounts allow.”

The campaign limits were challenged in court by Republican activist Shaun McCutcheon of Hoover, Ala., the national Republican Party and Senate GOP leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky. McCutcheon in 2012 contributed to 15 Republican and conservative candidates for Congress and wanted to give to 12 others but the law forbid him to do so. Now he can.

The Center for Responsive Politics reports that 650 donors contributed the maximum amount to candidates, PACs and parties in the 2012 election cycle.

OK, so the liberals are going nuts and shouting about the Koch Brothers, who are two very rich men who happen to support conservative causes. Liberals conveniently ignore the fact that the three richest men in America support Obama and that the majority of America’s billionaires and multimillionaires today are Democrats. In many cities there is hardly a “rich Republican” in sight. This is the liberals’ selective outrage at work.

In fact liberals have been wailing about the famous Citizens United case in 2010 in which the court decided 5-4 in favor the conservative viewpoint to free corporations to spend as much as they wish on campaign advocacy in separate ads, as long as their spending is not contributed directly to candidates and their campaigns. What the liberals conveniently omit is that labor unions were freed in their spending too in Citizens United. This means that Citizens United also favored Democrats. Here is why:

Who do labor unions contribute to?

They give virtually all of their money today to Democrats. So removing the cap on contributions from labor unions favors Democrats.

Right… But then corporations all contribute to Republicans, right?


Who does the New York Times contribute to? Democrats. Who does Google support? Obama. Who do most of the Silicon Valley billionaires support? Obama. Who do the two most important figures on Wall Street, Lloyd Blankfein and Jamie Dimon, support? Obama. Who will General Motors support? Democrats. Chrysler? Democrats. Who will Hollywood give their campaign contributions to? Democrats. And on and on. In fact many, many corporations and businesses today are avidly liberal.

So Democrats actually are making out best in both this McCutcheon decision and in Citizens United. That, friends, is a 2 out of 3 advantage for Democrats in these rulings. Yet the Democrats are screaming loudest.

Why? It is to shift the spotlight from the truth. Remember when Obama went to many more fundraisers than any of his predecessors before the 2012 election, without a peep of protest from Democrats or the Liberal Media? If Bush had done that there would have been media armageddon. Remember when Obama opted out of the federal “public financing” laws in both 2008 and 2012 in order to raise more money from wealthy Democrats than he would have been allowed to get under public financing?

Yet Democrats are the ones who call over and over for campaign spending limits and for public financing. This is to make us forget the truth. Liberals are the ones who benefit most from loose campaign funding laws because Democrats have more and more of the nation’s wealth. 14 of the 15 richest congressional districts in America today are represented by ultra-liberal Democrats like Nancy Pelosi and Mike Honda in California. Eight of the ten richest members of the US Congress are Democrats.

Democrats are the party of the rich but they want Americans to forget this fact.

This situation is much like that with so-called “clean election laws” where Democrats sponsor bill after bill on the federal, state and local level to regulate election laws to make them “cleaner”. This is to make it look like Democrats are Mr. Clean when it comes to elections. Meanwhile 99% of the voter fraud in America today comes from the same Democrats. In short, they should clean up their own act before advocating more and more laws. But they never will because they need to make a show of wanting “clean elections” as they steal every election in sight. This is to shift the spotlight from their congenital electoral criminality.

Look at how the federal government under Obama sent the Internal Revenue Service out to target conservative groups before the 2012 election in order to stop the Tea Parties from another election day sweep. This was blatant fraud from the party that says it wants “clean elections”.

(Please bookmark this website. And please recommend this site to all of your friends via Facebook and any other means. Let’s make the #1 conservative site by word of mouth. And if you would like to contribute to, please click the link at the upper right where it says “support this site”. Thank you, Nikitas)

This entry was posted in Current Events (More than 1,500 previous editorials!) and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.