Reply to a comment

Fossil:

The intent is clear. The pursuit of happiness is an expression describing the ability of every person in America to to acquire things, seek God or eternal balance, to privately create wealth based on his/her potential or to those who are brought into this world with wealth to distribute as they feel fit, or whatever is fulfilling.

To your insistence that wealth creates influence, so what, is that bad. I guess it is if you are anti-union and you hate the monies they pour in to defeat certain political candidates, but its not bad if you wish more labor influence in Congress.

But since you hate wealth influence, let me remind you that the wealthy of today are typically newcomers based on new innovations and industries that did not exist 20,30 or 40 years ago.

The giants of industry for the most part earned that wealth by "influencing" consumers of the benefits of their goods/services. The founders of Google, Facebbook, Talk show hosts, software developers etc whose names and industries that they created. And whose parental line did not include inheritance.

Essentially, the wealthy are a fluid group, people coming in and other leaving. The beauty of America is an Opray Winfrey can rise from poverty and rape and be an example of self-determination. And yes she can buy influence, but if the message is not resonating all the money in the world will not do justice.

And you assume all wealth dollars are of a single mindset.

So pick your "special interest" or lobbyist and send them money if you feel for the cause.

Fossil, it is not about morality or religious conviction, it is simply a constant reminder that freedom of speech will be eroded if we do not remind ourselves of how we got here and why we need to constantly uphold the Constitution.

See people want to be heard, left/right, fascist/racist/evangelicals, from all spectrums of the populace. Some may in fact be abhorrant but to place a dollar qualifier on free speech is WARPED becuause it stifles messages because you are wealthy. Free speech should not be stifled on any group that does not cause harm. Are there not "special interest" that represent the "small" people. Do you wish to stifle Sierra Club, community organizers, SEIU, America for Social Justice, Trial Lawyers Association. They all represent the "small" disadvantaged people in America.

Fossil: you are blinded. You would stifle free speech because the Congress we elect is influenced through greed and corruption. I believe you need to stifle greed and corruption and censorship misses the mark.