Montana Politics The Media

Montana Blog Roundup 26 February 2012

Shares

Highlighting some of the most interesting and provocative posts in the past week atbloground226 Montana blogs.

It’s hard not to love this story at the Button Valley Bugle about the efforts of the good legislators in Wyoming to protect the state in the event of a nuclear holocaust or zombie attack. Hell, they’re even willing to consider purchasing an aircraft carrier.

Pete Talbot makes the case for someone taking the responsibility to ensure that the Bakken boom is handled sustainably and responsibly as potential exploration sites across the state grow.

Montana Cowgirl took a look at the staggering incompetence of the TEA Party-led county commission “leading” Ravalli County.

D Gregory Smith wondered why Dennis Rehberg seems far to busy to meet with his constituents but has the time to cultivate secretive donations for his campaign. Perhaps he was too busy making jokes about drunks on the water.

Rob Natelson over at the Electric City weblog offered another example of what passes for conservative jurisprudence these days in his effort to defend the Citizens United  decision. This passage is just too good to be believed. Natelson writes, “right now, citizens who use the corporate form have their First Amendment rights back.”  I wonder if citizens using the canine form will soon have the right to express their rights as well.

The Montanafesto blog outed Yellowstone County Republican chair and sometimes TEA Party activist Jennifer Olsen as another anonymous online troll.

jhwygirl offered her own dissent to the Supreme Court’s decision in PPL v Montana, writing that now, “if you can’t float a boat, it’s up for sale to the highest bidder.”

Over here, we looked at Corey Stapleton’s shady campaign finance and Representative Rehberg’s inability to raise money from Montanans.

Have a great week everyone.

About the author

Don Pogreba

Don Pogreba is a seventeen-year teacher of English, former debate coach, and loyal, if often sad, fan of the San Diego Padres and Portland Timbers. He spends far too many hours of his life working at school and on his small business, Big Sky Debate.

His work has appeared in Politico and Rewire.

In the past few years, travel has become a priority, whether it's a road trip to some little town in Montana or a museum of culture in Ísafjörður, Iceland.

5 Comments

  • Okay, here's a refutation based on the law – the decision to take 'corporate form' has traditionally come at the expense of a great many rights of the corporation. Corporations are not limited by the biologic constraints of humans – many corporations are older than a human could ever live to be. Moreover, they lack the myriad of motivations that drive humans – instead they are in many cases obligated to pursue money over anything else. Corporate law previously acknowledged this; corporations had to be specifically chartered by legislation, and could be easily dissolved if they violated the public interest. There can thus be no question that the writers of the 14th amendment did not wish to apply the first amendment to corporations, as the general philosophy of government control of corporations differed dramatically from the respect for individual rights. Thus, the Citizen's United case is clearly out of line with the historical context.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: