The Democrats insist that this is all about keeping corporations from having too much influence on political discourse — a problematic enough assertion in and of itself; who are they to decide when somebody has too much free speech? — but they fail to deal with the fact that, under the law, there is no constitutional difference between Chevron and the New York Times Company — a corporation is a corporation is a corporation. Nonprofit corporations will fall under the same shadow. The proposed amendment would allow Congress to forbid not only financial contributions to political causes but also “in kind” contributions, which could mean anything from volunteer door-knocking to sympathetic television coverage to the endorsement of the Washington Post. […]
The Democratic talk about corporations is a bit of a dodge, generally, in that the amendment explicitly empowers Congress to suppress the free speech of “natural persons” — i.e., individuals — along with corporations.
no door knocking?
Obama will be without a job.
The Non-Crony Corporation PR Suppression Act.(?)
Something about Harry Reid reminds me of a reptile.
It’s in the eyes.
The death of a republic by a Nation now a one party state.Between Harry Reid a man who 120 years ago would have been a cattle rustler With the rest of the Chicago gang looking to kill free speech, to hold office fort life.