OCCUPY WALL STREET

[Cin]

http://www.truth-out.org/problem-cit...ood/1326497162

I thought this was a really interesting article. It talks about how the Supreme Court did not base it's decision regarding Citizens United on corporate personhood or the 14th amendment at all. Instead it went for a bizarre interpretation of the 1st amendment and free speech needing to be protected for those who have the right to listen. I guess to listen to campaign speeches and such. I guess that means its protecting me and my right to hear the crap these politicians have to say. Nobody seemed that interested in free speech when the angle is talking instead of listening as witnessed by the treatement of Occupy protestors. But I digress. The article also talks about a simpler way to overturn the Supreme Courts decisions surrounding Citizens United and earlier rulings regarding money in politics, than trying to get an amendment to the constitution. It's a long article but I found it worth the read.