Widgeon
13k posts, incept 2007-08-30
According to Views Espoused by those Supporting this Decision, King George (or a Domestic Front/Shell acting in his interest) could have just purchased all the assets of this nation in 1795 and ruled forever. That is a logical outcome of your line of thinking because to 'Restrain' that would have been a restraint on his freedom of speech.
IMHO, You are wrong ... Money is Not Speech and we've already done enormous damage to Liberty in this Nation trying to Accommodate "Constitutional Rights" for Corporations. The founders didn't have to go through any mental gerrymanders, etc. to write the Constitution. The gerrymanders that those in support of this decision (and the like) are going through to support their views is Prima Facie Proof that the views are flawed.
Really, This Time I'm Done w/ this Thread.
Peace.