February letter is full of 'red herring'
To the Editor:
This letter is sent in response to a letter I read in the February 2018 issue, "Corporations should have free speech rights." The author is offensive in his introduction, calling some friends of many misguided and untrue. Frankly, the adage "people that live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones" strongly applies here.
Many congressmen, senators on both sides of the aisle, and the four dissenting judges involved in the case agree with Carla and Deborah [authors of the "Heights of Democracy" column]. Is everyone misguided and lying?
[The letter writer] says next that the ideologues on the opposite side of his ideology are trying to limit free speech. This is simply untrue, when you consider that their ideology consistently states that corporations are not people, and money is not speech. And that the judges in this case were in error in their decision. Free speech is good, money is not speech, get it?
Instead of offering his readers pounds of red herring concerning the affects of BIG money infused into our political system, would the author please explain how the Citizens United case went from a poor little innocent movie company trying to get [its] truth out to billion[s] of corporate dollars going into our political system? This could scare a person also.
The presidential election is just one political campaign to take place in the last six or seven years since the court made this ruling; can it be that none of those other campaigns were affected? More red herring. I don't believe the flurry of statistics, dollar amounts, etc. written in this letter. I feel the author’s disdain for regulations that are in place that protect common people from the effects of corporate power on this country. Which democracy day is all about.