“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, that to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.”Our freedoms are from God, not the government. We, the people, choose to convey certain of those rights, with limitations delineated in the Constitution to the government. Freedom of expression and freedom of speech are not conveyed to the Government. The government cannot over step those rights. Also,
1. We don't live in a democracy, we live in a constitutional republic.
2. Corporations are ultimately own by, for the economic benefit of people. Shouldn't the people who own those corporations have the same rights as people who own anything else? You can use your car to pass out fliers for candidate...should the government be able to say to you,
Sorry your proportional use of that car is too highly skewed to politics. Why is a rich man'scash any different.
3. My points were mainly to protect individuals and associations who want to exercise their constitutional right of expression.
4. Most of the Founding Fathers were rich, and lost fortunes in the war to provide our freedoms. They exercised their God given right of expression.
5. People and 501c 3's generally give to politicians who agree with their views. The more people agree with their views, the more money they receive AND the more likely they are to get votes. You seem to think the politicians just stick their fingers up in the air and vote for whatever will get them the most money. Most politicians are not straight up whores who get economic benefit from foundations they form then sell out their country....although there are some.
6. Outlier or not, Proxmire and other candidates win, because they take centrist practical views which can be easily defended.
7. There is more spending....so what? Most people are ignorant of issues which affect our constitutional republic. For example, many ill-informed people they we live in a democracy and don't understand neither the foundational logic nor the genius behind the electoral college.
8. You seem great as asking questions and pointing to left wing articles (the Atlantic, Washington Compost and Socialist Public Radio). Go read National Review and get some balance. Perhaps, however, you can contemplate the core ideals behind these questions:
- why should the super rich have their freedoms impinged?
- you don't seem to have a problem taxing the shit out of them, so why can't they spend their money to convey their ideas in proportion with how much you tax them?
- who are you to say what anyone can spend their money on, as long as it doesn't hurt anyone?
- who are you to say who is super rich or rich...you should get your nose out of other peoples' bank accounts or tax returns...
- what if an individual feels so strongly on an issue, they want to take a second mortgage and take out ads for or against a candidate or issue....who are you to stop them? what right do you have to stop them?
And back to the point, why should the government prohibit gambling on sports events, especially when it has lotteries and allows casino gambling. Nanny state thinking....
we, the government will tell you what you can and can't do with your money
In Luce tua Videmus Lucem KRK