PDA

View Full Version : "Idiot Schumer Calls for Hearings on 'un-American' Supreme Court Decision"



megimoo
01-21-2010, 03:20 PM
"This Blithering Maoist Idiot Is Unbelievable,He Thinks They Rule America !"

The Supreme Court's ruling Thursday striking down limits on corporate and union spending in elections is "un-American," Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said Thursday.

Schumer, a top Senate Democrat who formerly ran their campaign committee, said he would hold hearings on the decision in the coming weeks.

"I think it's an un-American decision," Schumer said at a press conference Thursday. "I think when the American people understand what this radical decision has meant they will be even more furious and concerned about special interest influence in politics than they are today."

Democrats have responded quickly to rebuke the court's 5-4 ruling in the Citizens United vs. Federal Election Commission case, handed down Wednesday. The decision essentially kills a sizable portion of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002, better known as the McCain-Feingold Act for its high-profile sponsors.

The law, until this ruling, had subject corporations to special spending limits and disclosure rules that did not apply to individuals.

Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.), the sponsor of that 2002 law, has called for new legislation to address the court's ruling. Schumer said Thursday he'd hold hearings as chairman of the Senate Rules Committee.


http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/77293-schumer-calls-for-hearings-on-un-american-court-decision

Eagle
01-21-2010, 06:46 PM
Schumer should retire before he gets fired.

AlmostThere
01-21-2010, 07:15 PM
I would much rather he be fired then escorted from the company premises by security. :D

lacarnut
01-21-2010, 07:27 PM
The Democrats have their bowels in an uproar because the SC ruling levels the playing for campaign contributions and this schmuck does not like equality. Corporations will be on the same footing now with Unions and Trial Lawyers. Boo Hoo

Wei Wu Wei
01-21-2010, 09:24 PM
The Democrats have their bowels in an uproar because the SC ruling levels the playing for campaign contributions and this schmuck does not like equality. Corporations will be on the same footing now with Unions and Trial Lawyers. Boo Hoo

Do you realize that if candidates were restricted to public campaign funds then it would level the playing field not only between all corporations, and unions, and trial lawyers, but also with regular people too?

How on earth can people who claim to be on the side of "the people" not support this?

PoliCon
01-21-2010, 10:33 PM
I would much rather he be fired then escorted from the company premises by security. :D

and it will be easier to beat him than to beat an untainted dem . . .

PoliCon
01-21-2010, 10:34 PM
Do you realize that if candidates were restricted to public campaign funds then it would level the playing field not only between all corporations, and unions, and trial lawyers, but also with regular people too?

How on earth can people who claim to be on the side of "the people" not support this? FREEDOM you tool. It's about FREEDOM. :rolleyes:

lacarnut
01-21-2010, 10:42 PM
FREEDOM you" FOOL". It's about FREEDOM. :rolleyes:

Fixed.

PoliCon
01-21-2010, 10:49 PM
Fixed.

I prefer tool to fool. A tool is a fool who is also a dick :)

AlmostThere
01-22-2010, 02:26 AM
I prefer tool to fool. A tool is a fool who is also a dick :)
Touché

Constitutionally Speaking
01-22-2010, 06:50 AM
Do you realize that if candidates were restricted to public campaign funds then it would level the playing field not only between all corporations, and unions, and trial lawyers, but also with regular people too?

How on earth can people who claim to be on the side of "the people" not support this?

So you advocate GOVERNMENT controlled information??? How very statist of you!


Barring that, it would mean that the liberal-dominated media would get away with their advocacy "journalism".

We would NEVER know about Bill Ayers, Jeremiah Wright, the health care takeover etc.

We would never have found out that anthropogenic global warming is a hoax, we would have believed that our Marines were guilty in Haditha.


The people need ALL TYPES of information from ALL TYPES of sources. That is called FREEDOM - what do you have against freedom???

ironhorsedriver
01-22-2010, 09:11 AM
Do you realize that if candidates were restricted to public campaign funds then it would level the playing field not only between all corporations, and unions, and trial lawyers, but also with regular people too?

How on earth can people who claim to be on the side of "the people" not support this?
It's proven not to be a level playing field. Look at the clout the Unions and Lawyers carry now. Card Check, exemtion from Health tax, etc. Make it a true level field, then we will talk.

NJCardFan
01-22-2010, 11:59 AM
Hey Chucky, what part of "Congress shall make no law..." do you nimrods not get? And I find it funny how liberals have their panties in a wad over this but didn't bat an eye over the Kelo decision. A decision that was reminiscent of Stalinist Russia. That SC decision they were fine with.

Lager
01-22-2010, 05:27 PM
All the hand wringing over this among the rabid libs. One post on DU talked about how Bill Gates, with all his money, can now get whomever he wants elected to office.
Bill Gates, with all his money can't even convince people to trust Windows 7, he's going to convince them who to vote for?

And their crying over corporations having unbridled power now. But there's only four kinds of corporations according to them: Big Oil, Big Banks, Big Insurance and Big Retail. What about big transportation companies? blue jean makers, Hollywood film companies, sports franchises, computer chip makers, advertising, newspaper companies, media congomerates, book sellers, online auctions, search engines, shipping, agriculture, cereal makers, sport shoe makers, chubby ice cream creators, why shouldn't we have to worry about them?

PoliCon
01-22-2010, 05:54 PM
Hey Chucky, what part of "Congress shall make no law..." do you nimrods not get? And I find it funny how liberals have their panties in a wad over this but didn't bat an eye over the Kelo decision. A decision that was reminiscent of Stalinist Russia. That SC decision they were fine with.

Exactly. When they agree with SCOTUS - then that decision is sacrosanct and infallible - Roe v Wade.

Articulate_Ape
01-22-2010, 08:15 PM
Schumer should be fired. And all "fired" public servants should have their pensions and healthcare benefits severed just like the people they work for. No secret service for Presidents who get voted out of office as opposed to completing the full 8 year term(s) allowed by law. If you get fired, you are fired. No more taxpayer subsidized benefits. Period.

That will get their attention.

stsinner
01-22-2010, 09:28 PM
All the hand wringing over this among the rabid libs. One post on DU talked about how Bill Gates, with all his money, can now get whomever he wants elected to office.
Bill Gates, with all his money can't even convince people to trust Windows 7, he's going to convince them who to vote for?



That was poetic, Lager!! Perfect!

NJCardFan
01-22-2010, 11:42 PM
Exactly. When they agree with SCOTUS - then that decision is sacrosanct and infallible - Roe v Wade.

That's the thing. Roe v. Wade is as close to a liberal Commandment as your going to get. These people believe that the Bill of Rights is amendable. Hell, no amendment has been under siege as much as the 2nd Amendment. These people not only want it amended, they want it repealed. But Roe vs. Wade you might as well chisel into the tablets.

Last Samurai
01-24-2010, 10:47 AM
Same-o. Same-o.

The money is going to flow, either way. This just might make it a bit more above board.

As for the Rad Dems getting all dissed about it..... it's the same old tune.... "We want it OUR way! We want it NOW!"

I remember when "Liberal" meant somewhat openminded and concerned for everyone. Now it's just another dirty word for an oppressive, totalitarian power grab, in favor of the Elitists who seem to believe that they, and NO ONE else, have the solutions. A pox on THAT!

Recent events seem to indicate that mainstream America is not quite ready for the "Socialist" answer to our problems.

To me, the best approach to Government (at least ours) is to maintain a balance between the warring tribes (political positions). When balanced, the Government seems to leave my personal life alone.... a fine situation, in my humble opinion. Funny thing.... the Constitution is designed with that end in mind.... all the checks and balances, etc.

Too bad the Socialists are hard bent in trying to "fix" something that is not "broken".

LS

AlmostThere
01-24-2010, 01:51 PM
Schumer wants to hold hearings on the ruling. Obama wants to declare war on the ruling. Somebody help me out here. Are these 2 idiots not pissing into a strong blowing fan?

megimoo
01-24-2010, 02:03 PM
Schumer wants to hold hearings on the ruling. Obama wants to declare war on the ruling. Somebody help me out here. Are these 2 idiots not pissing into a strong blowing fan?It's all 'Horse shit and Gun smoke'.Schumer's one of the most hated critters in the Congress next to Nazi Nancy Pelosi !The Conservatives wouldn't work with him on a bet !

AlmostThere
01-24-2010, 03:09 PM
It's all 'Horse shit and Gun smoke'.Schumer's one of the most hated critters in the Congress next to Nazi Nancy Pelosi !The Conservatives wouldn't work with him on a bet !



My point is a SCOTUS decision cannot be appealed, overridden or reversed by any legal or legislative body other than the SCOTUS itself. Schumer has so little to do that he has the time and OUR tax dollars to conduct hearings on a matter that is a moot point? Obama was a Senior Lecturer at U. of Chicago. and he states he is declaring war on the verdict. If I had been one of his students I'd ask for a refund of my tuition for his class. He obviously doesn't know the most basic facts about our judicial system.

Either that or they just want to inflame the rabble. The former case being pathetic and the latter, despicable.