"Everyone knows" that corporations cannot make political donations. That's the law, according to some. That is the law that Tom Delay's been accused of violating -- that some corporate money was used in a political campaign. That's why he's been indicted, and why he's been arrested.

I'm eagerly awaiting the arrest of Charlotte Mayor Patrick McCrory.

The Charlotte Observer, "a Knight-Ridder publication" recently used approximately $2,000 worth of newspaper space to print their political advertisement for Mayor McCrory. In political terms, since it wasn't cash, it is considered an "in-kind" donation. So where's the DA?

Oh wait, "Free speech?" you cry? I agree. Now what's the difference? What is the difference between a corporation that happens to publish newspapers spending cash supporting their candidate and a company that make laundry detergent or a company that sells hot dogs spending cash supporting their candidate?

There is no difference.

If one company can spend money to help get some people elected, why can't all companies? Spending money is one of the primary ways to express freedom of speech. It's wrong to tell companies that only some, special, selected companies have free speech while others do not.

More corporate cash in elections wouldn't be great with today's bloated government, but if government were only doing what they were supposed to be doing, this would not be a problem.

I support free speech for everyone -- which includes anyone giving money to anyone they want to. I know -- it's a radical concept. I wonder where the ACLU is -- have they offered to defend Tom Delay's freedom of speech?

Posted by: Ogre at 06:57 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 270 words, total size 2 kb.