Supreme court decision is big win for local smutzer floyd brown

Thursday’s radical, precedent-overturning, Supreme Court decision from the same old men who gave us George W. Bush will open elections to uncontrolled floods of corporate money, and is being crowed over all over right-wing media.

It was a huge victory for former KVI talk host Floyd Brown, the evangelical Tacoman (University Place, actually) notorious for smutz campaigns against Democrats, famously at his apex with the Willie Horton ads that helped beat Dukakis in 1988.

It was his and Dave Bossie’s (another hard right operator) organization, Citizens United, who produced the Hillary Clinton hit movie (Hillary: The Movie) and wanted to spend corporate money to promote it. This judicially activist decision by the Bush court is Floyd's new apex: and as a cynical, far right activist, he should be proud.

(photo: Floyd Brown)

They won, and so did Republicans, and so the lobbies of big insurance, big healthcare, big oil, big meat, big agriculture, big media, big arms, big everything,... are now free to directly inject big money into any election, big or small. (Unions will benefit too, but the difference in pocket depth between labor and corporations is vast).

(We sure can't see how anyone who calls themself a libertarian could be happy with this green light for corporate-ized government, but bet your ass we won't be hearing any complaints from the tea-baggers, who claim to be libertarian but who are actually just right-wingers with funny hats).

Floyd couldn't raise much money or attract conservative big money in the 2008 elections (as did the Swift Boat attackers in 2004) to do his signature dirty deeds. He's been a little down in the heels, and under the radar. Expect that to change.

Floyd Brown has just been launched into the right-wing stratosphere. That's not good for America.

Comments

[Coiler]

Which makes their use of teabaggers irrelevant.

[Duffman]

One and the same.

[Ryder]

Go ahead. Let them overrun the airwaves with their idiot messages. Their lies. Exagerations. Stupidity. Couple good things might happen.

1..Cashed strapped radio stations will be able to sell a lot more commercials. Just what we all need.

2..The constant barrage of these messages will drive many of us to switch stations now and then. Check out other choices.

3..Most likely more listeners will begin getting turned off by all the over barrage of idiotic mindless mind numbing garbage.

[Coiler]

Plus, when was the last time a brief like this fast-tracked before the supreme court? In less than a year?

[Rich]

TIME IS RIGHT FOR TERM LIMITS, KEEP THE MONEY FLOWING

[KS]

The decision upholds the first amendment, which it wasn't doing before. It levels the playing field for future campaigns, so that not only the Unions can give endlessly, now the Corporations can.

McCain-Feingold and the repealing Glass-Stegel were the two worst legislative bills in the '90's.

[Tad]

so that not only the Unions can give endlessly, now the Corporations can.

I can't believe I just read this. Somebody tell me - please - nobody can be this dumb.

[Coiler]

well tad, folks like KS never read It Can't Happen Here. His side screamed about big Gubment, now It'll be big Logo.

[Ron]

Among just the Fortune 500 companies, there is over 3 Trillion dollars available to spend on elections.
So give me the name of a union that can or ever has spent that much.

I get the sense you feel this Supreme Court decision will not affect you, KS. This level playing field you speak of is not level at all. When you write a check to a candidate for $100 and a corporation matches it with 5 million, now who do you think the candidate is going to be interested in helping?

[Coiler]

He'll vote for the politician wearing the coveralls with the logo. His oldsmobile is now a person.

[Puget Sound]

Will Pres Obama go Carter or Clinton in the wake of the VA, NJ, and MA wake up calls? I am betting on him going Clinton ie tracking to the right and becoming Republican lite. It hasn't hurt him before. Check out during the 2008 Presidential Election.

None of the usual suspects cared that despite promising to take public funding if his opponent would do so elected to break that promise thereby being the first Presidential candidate to do so in the post Watergate era. So the tears shed on the Sup Ct Decision ring a little hollow.

At the time, one half of McCain Feingold said:
"This is not a good decision," said Sen. Russ Feingold, co-author of the McCain-Feingold campaign finance bill. "While the current public financing system for the presidential primaries is broken, the system for the general election is not. The entire system must be updated."

And the liberal group called 'Common Cause' issued a statement noting that "Sen. Obama did say at one point that he would opt into the system if his opponent did the same, and for that he gets a demerit."

Candidate Obama did it cause he could.
Candidate McCain stuck to his pledge and followed the rules.

[Puget Sound]

More on President Carter or President Clinton for Pres Obama.

Go to Orbus Max stories on Pres Obama moving to the right: (a good thing)

"Obama Quietly Issues Ruling Saying It's Legal For The FBI To Break The Law On Accessing Phone Records.

Following the report earlier this week that the FBI regularly broke the ECPA law, in obtaining information from telcos without going through the proper process (and, in some cases using just a post it note!), some interesting details from the full report have come to light. The two key ones? First, "the Obama administration issued a secret rule almost two weeks ago saying it was legal for the FBI to have skirted federal privacy protections." And, second, the original idea to use these bogus "exigent letters" didn't come from the FBI, but from an AT&T employee. We noted in the original report that no one seemed to be placing any blame on the telcos for allowing this, and why they're clearly abusing the law, in giving out such info without the proper rules being followed, seems like a big question"

or this:

"A Justice Department-led task force has concluded that nearly 50 of the 196 detainees at the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, should be held indefinitely without trial under the laws of war, according to Obama administration officials.

The task force’s findings represent the first time that the administration has clarified how many detainees it considers too dangerous to release but unprosecutable because officials fear trials could compromise intelligence-gathering and because detainees could challenge evidence obtained through coercion.

Human rights advocates have bemoaned the administration’s failure to fulfill President Obama’s promise last January to close the Guantanamo Bay facility within a year as well as its reliance on indefinite detention, a mechanism devised during George W. Bush’s administration that they deem unconstitutional.

"There is no statutory regime in America that allows us to hold people without charge or trial indefinitely,” said Anthony D. Romero, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union."

So Pres Obama doubles down on Afghanistan, keeps Gitmo open and we hear nothing from the Left. No protests, no signs, nothing.

I'll wait for the Olberman Special Comment....LMAO.
Looks like it was all just for political points. I thought you all were wrong but could have some respect if it was a deep rooted conviction. Turns out it was all just for election purposes.

[KS]

"so that not only the Unions can give endlessly, now the Corporations can.

I can't believe I just read this. Somebody tell me - please - nobody can be this dumb."

Tad, I wouldn't expect a progressive pinhead like yourself to be able to grasp that basic truth.

"I get the sense you feel this Supreme Court decision will not affect you, KS. This level playing field you speak of is not level at all. When you write a check to a candidate for $100 and a corporation matches it with 5 million, now who do you think the candidate is going to be interested in helping?"

Have you been sleeping under a rock since 2001 ?
It's already happening, dude ! Sure, it's wrong, but blame McCain-Feingold for this. The Unions and 527 groups have been doing what you describe above. I guess that's OK with you, but when the "evil" corporations are able to do similarly now, that's not. To clarify my position, I wished that the SCOTUS would have repealed the entire McCain-Feingold law.

[KS]

"Will Pres Obama go Carter or Clinton in the wake of the VA, NJ, and MA wake up calls? I am betting on him going Clinton ie tracking to the right and becoming Republican lite. It hasn't hurt him before. Check out during the 2008 Presidential Election."

PutS - My vote is for Carter. Obama is too much of a rigid Alinskyite and not politically as astute as Clinton to track toward the center. He told the House Minority leader Boehner and the rest of the House leadership that he would rather "Pass Health Care and enact his agenda and be a one-term President than fail to enact the major part of his agenda and end up serving two-terms as President."

[KS]

TIME IS RIGHT FOR TERM LIMITS, KEEP THE MONEY FLOWING

I am with you on that. In the long run Term limits will be the only check against the corruption and greed of special interests who are running the government. The results of 1994 midterm elections looked good for maybe a year or two, but were quickly washed away by the polluted environment of DC - corruption and greed and the infiltration of special interests into their legislation.
I see a repeat coming in 2010, where the results will clean out the corruption and bring government back to the people for only a short time until special interests and follow the money corrupts the new crop of politicians. Term limits would stem that tide to some degree and give the people more ability to be engaged in the process.

However, the SCOTUS dealt a big blow against Term Limits a few years ago and if there is to ever be term limits, it will have to be up to the people to resurrect it starting at a Grass Roots level.

[Jason Andersen]

Progressives, of whom I identify myself with, can dismiss Scott Brown’s victory as further evidence of Diebold’s scam with electric ballots or whatever, and keep calling people in the Tea Party movement “tea baggers,” (guys, it was kinda funny the first or second time, but it gets old the 57,000th time!), but they’d be better off to recognize that the Tea Party movement has tapped into a sound fiscal virtue, that it is unsustainable to have deficits as high as we have now.

A country cannot be admitted to the European Union if their deficit is >3 percent of their gross national product!

Having said that, I think, given the magnitude of the present financial crisis, that President Bush’s and President Obama’s approaches of stimulus have been warranted. But while the federal government can play a pivotal role to get things moving again, if you would, the real recovery will be private sector borne, when investors, entrepreneurs, and small businesses have the confidence to want to start spending and borrowing capital and hire new people.

A strong, robust federal government has its place, but it also has its limits. At least, I think that we can celebrate the death of the religious right with the rise of Scott Brown and many Tea Party folks, such as Dick Armey.

Scott Brown seems decidedly libertine: he is kinda proud of having posed nude in a Cosmo centerfold; he offered his barely legal daughters as “available;” he supports Roe v. Wade; and he regards legalized same sex marriage as settled law in Massachusetts.

You know that in the 80’s or 90’s, that the Christian Coalition, Dobson, Falwell, Robertson, et al., would have been all over him to repent and change his positions, or else they’d take a hard line against him. But they’re dinosaurs these days, about ready to tip over for good. And thank goodness, because many Tea Party people and Ron Paul supporters are very libertarian, not just in economics, but in fierce opposition to social moralists who want to impose their warped world view on the private lives of others.

I can never fathom Roe v. Wade being overturned, and I can definitely see same sex marriage as not only being recognized at the federal level, but being accepted by most people in less than half a generation, probably only opposed by about the same percentage of people who still are uncomfortable with interracial marriage (maybe +/- 25%).

Progessives should be happy because in a chess players’ scheme, we are winning. We just need to retool a little. And it’s to our peril to dismiss the Tea Parties as just being some astro turf mob of birthers, racists, and evangelical freaks.

[KS]

"Progessives should be happy because in a chess players’ scheme, we are winning. We just need to retool a little."

I seriously question whether true progressives really want a Democratic Republic like we have had. Especially, with the MO of the current President as he stated just before the 2008 elections is that he "was going to fundamentally transform the United States of America". What do you believe he wanted to transform the USA to ? We are seeing it right now - big government is the answer, which falls right into line with the progressive movement, although he has taken some different routes. If Health insurance reform (the framework for government run health care)
does not pass, he will deem himself as a failure. Cap and Trade is another big government program which appears doomed at this time.

Have you read the history about progressivism, when it had its roots back in the early 1900's with Teddy Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson ? The Progressive movement instituted both the Progressive income tax and prohibition.

"And it’s to our peril to dismiss the Tea Parties as just being some astro turf mob of birthers, racists, and evangelical freaks."

I concur with that statement.

[joanie]

Jason, while I appreciate your post, you make it sound like gay marriage is our only issue.

As for small business getting started, they can't get loans. It's not that they're not trying, the banks aren't lending. And people have to start spending money. Right now they are saving which is a good thing even though it hurts business.

And with the new decision on corporate money, as one pundit said: "Hello, President Palin." To which I'll add, "good-bye environment."

I'm glad you think things are going our way. I think there's more to "moral" than just gay marriage. And Falwell has already tipped.

And as for Diebold, Brad has already chimed in on that. Whether you like it or not, facts are facts. We need to include them in the discussion.

As for our big win in the end on moral issues: that's probably a result that young people are simply not as bigoted as older people who came from a much more racially and religiously separated society. Now, instead of the catholics vx. the protestants, it's the christians vs. the muslims. We're a global society now. The people change but the story stays the same.

Things will look a lot different in twenty years. But I'm not as optimistic as you. Having said all that, I hope you're right. I remember Germany. I think about Hawaii. I look at Africa. And then I think about the rise of China.

I hope you're right.

[KS]

President Palin ? ROFLMAO

I can just visualize the collective heads of progressives all over this land exploding at that proclamation.

Reminds me of the movie "Mars Attacks" when the martians where their heads explode to the sound of Indian Love Song by Slim Whitman.

[joanie]

Great column by Huffington "Hope" Has Been a Bust, It's Time for Hope 2.0

[Mr. Smith]

Here's another joanie:

Court's campaign finance decision a case of shoddy scholarship

"In opening the floodgates for corporate money in election campaigns, the Supreme Court did not simply engage in a brazen power grab. It did so in an opinion stunning in its intellectual dishonesty.

"..."If it is not necessary to decide more, it is necessary not to decide more," a wise judge once wrote. That was Chief Justice John G. Roberts -- back when -- and dissenting Justice John Paul Stevens rightly turned that line against him.

"...Fourth, the majority bizarrely invoked the "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington" defense. Under the Austin ruling, Justice Anthony M. Kennedy argued, lawmakers unhappy with being lampooned in the movie "could have done more than discourage its distribution -- they could have banned the film." Beyond untrue. There is no scenario under which works of art about fictional lawmakers could be limited by campaign finance laws.

That the majority would stoop to this claim underscores the weakness of its case -- and the audacity of the result it has inflicted on the political process."

[Coiler]

Nobody can define how Carter was a bad president, other than he didn't pardon the previous president or run an illegal program selling guns to Iran. These are considered good and just things by republicans after Watergate.

[KS]

Coiler - Carter enabled terrorists specifically in Iran - bad move when his administration supported removing the Shah, then he trusted rogue nations/almost signed a nuclear disarmament treaty with the Soviets (SALT)- which would have lost the Cold War. Historians look at pardoning Nixon by Ford as the right thing to do, even though it hurt him politically.

Of course I am sure I am wasting my time with you progressives because you are not honest in anything you say or do politically therefore you are certainly not going to be honest in the most obscure of discussions.

[Coiler]

You're just wasted time.

[TommyOate]

Spot on coiler at least he didn't get $400 haircuts or knock-up a campaign worker and deny it and then run, run, run when having to face it, even to Haiti where he wants the world to think he's repenting. Understand of course Haiti is probably a lot less rugged than at home with Liz. But I'm sure he thanks you for your support. Bwahahahaha

[sparky]

DuffyOatmeal you are an odd little man. Still waiting for you to post all those "vicious" comments I said to Tommy008. What a wiener.

[TommyOate]

Just no response for JE is there.
Bwahahaha you crack me up.

[KS]

Even tho Carter was one of the worst presidents in modern history, I would not rate Carter as nearly bad as Joanie's candidate - John Edwards would have been.

[sparky]

DuffOatmeal, we already covered that a long time ago. Both Joanie and I said he was a jerk for doing this.
I thought half-Canadian people were more circumspect?

[Puget Sound]

DuffOatmeal, we already covered that a long time ago. Both Joanie and I said he was a jerk for doing this.
I thought half-Canadian people were more circumspect?

Posted by: sparky | January 23, 2010 at 06:35 PM

oh sparkles, you may have trouble believing this but all because you commented on it doesn't mean that others won't comment on it.
it's LMAO time with you. whenever inconvenient ie crap that hurts Dems comes out you trot out the old, 'nothing to see here i already commented on it' line.
for someone who is always complaining about others telling you what to think you seem to have no problem telling others what to say.

[sparky]

Duffy can say anything he likes. But Joanie and I talked about it earlier and I really dont have anything new to say about it. You guys can yuck it up over it if you want. Doesn't matter.

[TommyOate]

Obviously it does. You are too much.
Bwahahahahahahahaha

[TommyOate]

Why don't you face it sparky you're simply a tool.

[Puget Sound]

geez, you seem a bit more addled than usual. you post to tell us you have nothing to post about. oooookaaayyyy.

and why the hell are you assuming tommyoate to be duffman?

maybe you should be getting out in the sun to get some of that mood enhancing vitamin D.

[Tad]

They're all a waste of time, Coiler.

[KS]

Coiler-Tad-Gary love to play 3rd grade gotcha games- because they have nothing else of any substance to contribute to the blog except their own inane lies. No one takes you seriously.

Try Sound Politics and see how your schtick goes over. They are very understanding and I am sure they will welcome it especially Fudge.

[Puget Sound]

Looks like those Hope and Change mantra went out the window. LMAO

More Astroturfing going on:

"Ellie Light: Obama Astroturfer? Or Very, Very, Very Energetic But Independent Letter Writer? With Houses All Over the Nation?

"A woman has written the same letter defending Obama to dozens of publications across the country, getting them published in at least 42 newspapers in 18 states, as well as Politico.com, the Washington Times, and USA Today. And the woman, Ellie Light, has claimed residence in many of these states.

Think there might be some phony Astroturfing there?

At the Cleveland Plain Dealer, Sabrina Eaton makes a nice catch:

Ellie Light sure gets around.

In recent weeks, Light has published virtually identical “Letters to the Editor” in support of President Barack Obama in more than a dozen newspapers.Every letter claimed a different residence for Light that happened to be in the newspaper’s circulation area.

“It’s time for Americans to realize that governing is hard work, and that a president can’t just wave a magic wand and fix everything,” said a letter from alleged Philadelphian Ellie Light, that was published in the Jan. 19 edition of The Philadelphia Daily News.

A letter from Light in the Jan. 20 edition of the San Francisco Examiner concluded with an identical sentence, but with an address for Light all the way across the country in Daly City, California.

Variations of Light’s letter ran in Ohio’s Mansfield News Journal on Jan. 13, with Light claiming an address in Mansfield; in New Mexico’s Ruidoso News on Jan. 12, claiming an address in Three Rivers; in South Carolina’s The Sun News on Jan. 18, claiming an address in Myrtle Beach; and in the Daily News Leader of Staunton, Virginia on Jan. 15, claiming an address in Waynesboro. Her publications list includes other papers in Ohio, West Virginia, Maine, Michigan, Iowa, Pennsylvania and California, all claiming separate addresses.

She has more houses than John McCain!"

People catching on and oh yeah, another Dem retires rather than face the electorate...hmmm, Speaker Kantor sounds damn good.

[Michele]

Oh you guys....don't you know who was riding to "Marcia" Coakley's rescue in the latter days of her failed campaign???

Why, it was "Big" Pharma and Big Insurance! You guys are in major denial!

[Weasels ripped my flesh]

spot on, Michele !

[Jason Andersen]

Joanie, you're sooooooo right about this younger generation not being nearly as wired for racism and homophobia as even my generation was, and I am only 33!

If I was in high school or college today, I could have had a normal dating life (I am maybe 80% gay; 20% straight), and I wouldn't have had to mislead sweet girls who loved me and thought that I only loved them...just so much messy emtotional turmoil and scars are the result of traditionalists' homophobia.

I even used to be a conservative Republican (in my stupid teens!), so I know how they think. Not wanting to be hostage to the religious right, I then became a Libertarian for awhile, but Libertarians don't accomplish anything except usually letting the bad guy win in very narrow races.

After McCain chose Palin and then suspended his campaign because Lehman Bros. went out of business, I had an epiphany: President Obama made being a progressive Democrat cool to me and, more importantly, make sense! I am more confident that their agenda will help us compete in the 21st Century. I am still undecided about cap and trade and need to educate myself and read more, and I don't like the individual mandate in the health care proposal, but I think it's all moving in the right direction.