SOTU open thread: Blame the lobbyists! Fund high-speed rail boondoggles! Spending freeze plan met with near-silence, laughter; disses SCOTUS in front of SCOTUS
Scroll for updates/liveblogging…
We’re an hour and a half away from President Obama’s Swagga Recovery Speech. He’s going to get his mojo back, we’re told, by acknowledging missteps — and then dumping the blame on lobbyists. Seriously. I know a lot of folks are organizing SOTU drinking games. But I don’t need the headache. This White House’s rhetorical writhing provides enough hangover to last until 2012.
From excerpts of the speech posted at NYT:
Rather than fight the same tired battles that have dominated Washington for decades, it’s time for something new. Let’s try common sense. Let’s invest in our people without leaving them a mountain of debt. Let’s meet our responsibility to the people who sent us here.
To do that, we have to recognize that we face more than a deficit of dollars right now. We face a deficit of trust – deep and corrosive doubts about how Washington works that have been growing for years. To close that credibility gap we must take action on both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue to end the outsized influence of lobbyists; to do our work openly; and to give our people the government they deserve.
That’s what I came to Washington to do. That’s why – for the first time in history – my Administration posts our White House visitors online. And that’s why we’ve excluded lobbyists from policy-making jobs or seats on federal boards and commissions.
But we cannot stop there. It’s time to require lobbyists to disclose each contact they make on behalf of a client with my Administration or Congress. And it’s time to put strict limits on the contributions that lobbyists give to candidates for federal office. Last week, the Supreme Court reversed a century of law to open the floodgates for special interests – including foreign companies – to spend without limit in our elections. Well I don’t think American elections should be bankrolled by America’s most powerful interests, and worse, by foreign entities. They should be decided by the American people, and that’s why I’m urging Democrats and Republicans to pass a bill that helps to right this wrong.
I’m also calling on Congress to continue down the path of earmark reform. You have trimmed some of this spending and embraced some meaningful change. But restoring the public trust demands more. For example, some members of Congress post some earmark requests online. Tonight, I’m calling on Congress to publish all earmark requests on a single website before there’s a vote so that the American people can see how their money is being spent.
Obama lied, transparency died. That was clear a year ago. From my May 6, 2009 column, here’s a reminder of how committed Obama is to disclosure and the public trust:
[H]ostility to transparency is a running thread through Obama’s cabinet:
• Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for years fought disclosure of massive donations from foreign governments and corporations who filled her husband’s library and foundation coffers.
• Top Obama advisor David Axelrod ran fear-mongering astro-turf campaigns in support of a huge utility rate hike – and failed to disclose that the ads were funded for Commonwealth Edison in Chicago.
• Labor Secretary Hilda Solis failed to disclose that she was director and treasurer of a union-promoting lobbying group pushing legislation that she was co-sponsoring.
• Attorney General Eric Holder overruled his own lawyers in the Justice Department over the issue of D.C. voting rights (which he and President Obama support) and refused to make public the staffers’ opinion that a House bill on the matter was unconstitutional.
• And as I reported last month, Obama’s nominee for the No. 2 official at the Department of Housing and Urban Development, former King County, Wash. Executive Ron Sims, has the distinction of being the most fined government official in his state’s history for suppressing public records from taxpayers.
President Obama set the tone, breaking his transparency pledge with the very first bill he signed into law. On January 29, [2009] the White House announced that Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act had been posted online for review. One problem: Obama had already signed it – in violation of his “sunlight before signing” pledge to post legislation for public comment on the White House website five days before he sealed any deal.
Obama broke the pledge again with the mad rush to pass his trillion-dollar, pork-stuffed stimulus package full of earmarks he denied existed. Jim Harper of the Cato Institute reported in April 2009: “Of the eleven bills President Obama has signed, only six have been posted on Whitehouse.gov. None have been posted for a full five days after presentment from Congress…”
It’s this utter disregard for taxpayer accountability that prompted hundreds of thousands of citizens to take to the streets on Tax Day 2009 for Tea Party protests. The trampling of transparency inspired signs that read: “No legislation without deliberation” and “READ THE BILL FIRST.” Obama’s response was first to claim that he hadn’t even heard of the Tea Party movement and then, on his 100-day celebration, to deride all those Americans he is supposed to represent of “playing games.”
Projection, anyone? When it comes to toying with transparency, President Obama is a master at “playing games.”
Hey, President Obama, how about your pal SEIU president Andy Stern’s illegal lobbying activities at 1600 Pennsylvania? Let the sun shine in.
How about Alston and Bird lobbyist Tom Daschle’s undue influence in your Oval Office? Drain the swamp.
***
9:07pm Eastern. Instead of drinking, I’m going to do a push-up every time O says “I,” “change,” “jobs,” “investment,” or “clear.”
Obama arrives. There are more forced smiles in the room than at a Miss World beauty pageant.
Obama clunkifies Tom Paine: “These are the times that tested the courage of our convictions.”
He blames failures of Washington DC. “Numbing weight of politics.”
Has someone clued him into the fact that HE is Washington DC. HE is the numbing weight.
O: “We all hated the bank bailout…it was as popular as a root canal.” Biden grinning from ear to ear. Quickly moves on to rationalizing the bank bailout. “I supported the last administration’s efforts…we made it more transparent…we recovered most of the money.”
Except for the money that Geithner allowed AIG to fork over to its counterparties in secret, of course.
Obama lambastes Wall Street for a few minutes more, then pats himself on the back for cutting taxes. Not mentioned: Massive tobacco tax hikes to pay for SCHIP expansion.
Praises his recovery/stimulus behemoth. Here we go: Jobs, jobs, jobs.
Gotta do my push-ups.
9:30pm Eastern. Oh, no. Here comes the high-speed rail boondoggle. Unions rejoicing.
Clean energy boondoggle. Unions rejoicing.
9:38pm Eastern. Obama tosses a bone to the Right — paying lip service to support nuclear power and offshore drilling — before championing cap-and-tax. Pelosi bolts to her feet. O downplays the ClimateGate scandal (Republicans boo) and argues that massive intervention should be pursued despite the junk science.
9:51pm Eastern. Time for a Blame Bush interlude.
9:54pm Eastern. Snort: Obama’s spending freeze proposal falls totally flat. Not even a smattering of applause. A smittering. Is that a word?
Obama says the freeze won’t take place until next year.
LAUGHTER from the chamber. LOLOLOL.
Snippy Obama: “That’s how budgeting works.”
More laughter.
10:05pm Eastern. He’s lambasted GOP obstructionism, lambasted permanent campaigning (“We were sent here to serve our citizens, not our ambitions”) and political ambitions, and lamented the loss of unity after 9/11.
“I’m not interested in re-litigating the past.” Just in litigating jihadis in American civilians courts!
10:18pm Eastern. In one breath, Obama promises to repeal “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell,” guarantee gender pay equity (he did this last year already with passage of the Lily Ledbetter Act), and to push for shamnesty. Phew.
Wrap-up summary of final speech remarks: People are cynical. Don’t blame me. I never promised you peace and harmony. Let’s fight. Let’s get things done. Forget about all my missteps over the last year. CHANGE (the subject)!
***
The full text of the speech is here.
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
 |
Obama’s latest campaign angle: I’ve been saving America from wild Republican debts
May 24, 2012 04:33 PM by Doug Powers
36 Comments
Stammertime: Jay Carney asked if Chicago protests have soured Obama’s support for OWS
May 23, 2012 07:44 PM by Doug Powers
53 Comments
Biden: Tea Party stopped us from growing the economy
May 23, 2012 01:55 PM by Doug Powers
44 Comments
Catholic lawsuit against Obamacare mandate cites 1993 legislation written by Ted Kennedy and Chuck Schumer
May 22, 2012 04:35 PM by Doug Powers
48 Comments
Biden: Hey, I don’t blame people for voting for a convicted felon instead of my boss
May 18, 2012 01:21 PM by Doug Powers
73 Comments
Senate narrowly votes down Obama budget
May 16, 2012 06:09 PM by Doug Powers
47 CommentsTransparency update: Donors told to hand over cell phones upon entering Obama fundraisers
May 15, 2012 04:40 PM by Doug Powers
42 Comments
Categories: Barack Obama
Nice Deb
» The Organized Left Now Stalking RomneyNewsBusters.org
» Very Annoyed Matthews Rips ‘Horse’s Ass Right-Wingers’ Who Cite ‘Thrill Up My Leg,’ Calls C-SPAN Host a ‘Jackass’Nice Deb
» Uncovered Ad Shows Obama Appeared At 1996 Event Hosted By Democratic Socialists of AmericaNice Deb
» Uncovered Ad Shows Obama Appeared At 1996 Event Hosted By Democratic Socialists of AmericaNewsBusters.org
» Reuters's Freeland: 'Anorexic' Americans Think Tax Bite Too Heavy When In Fact It's Dangerously Thin
Someone please explain how did he cut taxes to 95% when in FACT they will have to pay taxes on the tax cut this year when they file?????
HHHMMMM fuzzy math. I can’t wait till they all do their taxes this year LMAO!!!
ABSOLUTELY ! ! !
Let them impale themselves on healthcare.
The time for half measures and talk is over.
Trucker son says this is an IMPROVEMENT. Breitbart in a different speech, Barry used “I” between 130-140 times. In ONE speech.
RINO McCain on FOX
Please go away!
Thank you Affirmative Action. Just goes to show you anybody can become President, just not anyone can BE a President.
Pigpole. ‘Nuff said.
The longer this man is in office, the more I want “change”, too. I hope change will be delivered by the people in November, 2012.
The economy,Obama’s arrogance,and health care will be the Democrat’s Waterloo. Let’s roll.
Nope, you right there!
But we be fixin’ to change the sheets in the WH in 2012, and your enablers this November, Jack!
Why do you mention sheets?
Obvious reference to the KKK?
Racist.
Only a liberal left person would take that to be racist…..you have to be kidding what is wrong with you people? They meant when a new president comes in they will change the sheets!
Whay is EVERYTHING about race from you oversensitive blowhards!!!!
Can Nancy or Harry call the Supreme Court on the carpet for Justice Alitto’s shaking his head and mouthing the words “not true” when Obama claimed they overturned “a 100 years of precedent” in their ruling on free speech. Funny, I didn’t know McCain and Feingold were that old. I guess they can’t get at them the way the could Pete Wilson.
Gosh, never thought I’d defend Chap, but I am pretty sure he was kidding about the sheets.
Try AA.
Chap wasn’t the one that made the joke about sheets. He was the one that automatically took it as racist
ObaMao sounded like he was speaking to a room full of idiots.
He was, but he didn’t need to sound like he thought it.
We need to impeach him YESTERDAY.
God, the Terrorists are laughing at us. They need to do NOTHING ELSE. Just leave Obama in office and our government will implode.
Guys, Chappo is cool.
Drunk, like some of us, but cool.
Back down. Let’s save the venom for the ENEMY.
ObaMao and his ilk.
Okay, I had to be out [and out of range of radio, TV and internet], so I missed the whole thing – well, all but the last 10 minutes. I couldn’t believe he was still talking when I got in my car and turned on the radio. But the radio station decided to go to break and spared me Obama’s wrap-up.
I’ll catch up on the comments later – and the speech
– but for now I have a question: how many of you are soused from playing the drinking game? 
KKK?
Keep Kansas Klean?
Oh. My. God.
Lighten up, some of you.
That was such a spurious, obviously contrived connection, that I think you would have to be drunk to take it seriously.
chapoutier said:
As Foghorn Leghorn would say,
Imagine a “/sarc” tag at the end, and everything will be OK.
Chap, you crack me up sometimes!
It wasn’t a joke, or a racist comment. It was a reference to laundering the WH for a different president…cleaning house.
If it were intended to be racist, it would most likely refer to changing the leadership of the KKK, which would be a far cry from the conversation.
With 90 used of the “I” word, the Shot Per I, um, some people are just not totally awake.
Chap,
As an attorney, what did you think of POTUS/TOTUS smearing the SCOTUS?
We’ll all be friends again tomorrow.
Unless the BAC hasn’t gone down. Then it will be the weekend.
When we can do a shot for every BANK that fails.
“I” 96 times = 96 sips
“Me/My/” 18 times = 18 sips
Wild Turkey “Rare Breed” 103 proof
made it all bearable
He didn’t freaking smear them. He said he didn’t like their decision.
They are adults. They can take criticism too, just like the other two co-equal branches.
What a silly non-issue.
I was wondering if anyone was counting. Didn’t bother to watch. I’m so fed up with this egomaniac figured watching him wasnt’t worth it.
Chap,
He lied, and I consider that lie a smear.
Silly non-issue?
Think again.
This will be discussed by both sides for quite a while.
It was… unprecedented!
In what way?
You are right. it wasn’t a century. It was a century and three years.
Look up the Tillman act.
Try Lotho.
*obscure The Hobbit and Lord of the Rings reference – the books, not the movies.
Goodnight, Chap, I’m heading to bed.
I really miss Richard Harris – both the singer (remember his cover of Jimmy Webb’s MacArthur Park?
) and the actor.
Okay, it’s midnight here and the re-run of OB’s State of dis-Union is coming on in a few minutes. I may or may not make it through the whole thing.
To those of you who did [in real time], you have both my sympathy and respect.
And from the snippets I’ve read and heard so far, I imagine our hostess has had a vigorous work-out.
I don’t know what you think that proves. The Tillman Act was upheld as valid by the Court in 1982. Bellotti and Buckley are both from the late 1970s.
This president has terminal narcissism. There is no known cure for him. He will hopefully get the boot in 2012 and retire back to Chicago-land to write lots of books about himself and give lots of speeches about himself to his hangers-on who want to hear his rhetoric. In the meantime, maybe he should actually go to a church and say some prayers for guidance. If he can bow to world leaders, he can bend a knee to God. What a waste of four years.
Don’t worry, chap, the environmentalists will put the kibosh on that, just as they have on new oil refineries, and even some wind-farms.
Okay, I just heard him say he wants to give money to the small community banks.
From what I know of our small community bankers, they don’t want it, because [among other things] it will give the fed more power over them.
The congress-critters sure seemed to like the idea – those on TOTUS’s side of the aisle anyway.
Derek Jacobi – he was great in this, but even better in I, Claudius (and the book is pretty good too
)
Oliver Reed – another late, great actor. This was, IIRC, his last role. *sigh*
Hubby decided he couldn’t stomach a second go-round of OB’s State of dis-Union, so he just put in the DVD of Rear Window.
*breathes sigh of relief*
Good night, all!
Late to the ball, as usual…
Let me say I have a kink–
I hate being lied to…by anyone.
Tonight I was lied to repeatedly by someone who I doubt anyone in that chamber…regardless of their capacity for delusion…believed.
I have no idea if even he believes his many and various outright lies, but I greatly fear he does, and that nobody near him has the wherewithal to speak truth to his powerful narcissism.
I despair for my nation, and it would be far worse but for the events of last week, and my conviction that people really do get it.
The overarching take-away from THE ONE’s big plans…
let’s screw with markets even more than ever before.
That will serve to lengthen and deepen our economic woes, inevitably.
Seen while surfing Facebook:
President O-bla-bla-bla-ma
Ain’t it the truth!
Both my son and I commented on the “look” on the messiahs face. He looks down on the rabble – down his nose and has that haughty arrogance that only a narcissist could engender. He is purely the most self-centered person I have ever seen. He tells us it is “not about me” so many times but, everything puking forth from that piehole aggrandizes him and there is no way around that FACT!!!!
This guy has learned nothing and continues to be all form and no substance. His insane Bush bashing is the sign of a man with nothing useful or substantive to offer and the total inability to accept responsibility for his actions. He will soon destroy the entire country and the credit will go to the enlightened voters that forced him upon us. These are very sad times for the Republic.
Being the Iron Man I am I got about half way through the I am Who I am and Bush Did It but watching Pelosi’s facial whatever and her bobbing up like a cork got old.
They broke me.
Context chap, context.
“He didn’t freaking smear them. He said he didn’t like their decision.”
Its the STATE OF THE UNION address. Not the time nor the place. Obama once again demonstrates he is not a leader he is a partisan hack.
Wow! AP does a fact check on Barryo’s STFU SOTU.
Conclusion: YOU LIE
Re: Barry’s “Deficit Commission”: As I recall in parliamentary procedures – technically a commission is appointed by the governing body with authority to act with full authority of that body. A committee researches and makes recommendations to the body. Barry’s deficit “commission” would have no authority to do anything.
WHERE CONGRESS GETS CALLED OUT ALL THE TIME FOR WHAT THEY HAVE OR HAVE NOT DONE. Why should the other co-equal branch not expect similar treatment.
My goodness, it is curious how fragile and precious everyone here wants to treat the SCOTUS all of the sudden.
This is entirely contrived anger.
“This is entirely contrived anger.”
Not angry at all. The American people in general regardless of their politics know impolite and rude when they see it. Obama was rude, is rude. His arrogance was on display with his comments. Being able to judge the time and a place for a thing is part of common sense and maturity. Obama has none.
Me I’m excited to see how Obama just made the rest of his term harder and the elections in 2010 and 2012 more likely to lean right.
The Supreme Court regardless of your opinion of their decisions deserves a certain level of respect. Obama showed none towards them. Obama is a spoiled brat.
SCOTUS to POTUS after SOTU: STFU
Don’t really see anyone angry here either, chap; save possibly at your usual condescending tone.
Checks and balances. SCOTUS ruled a law was unconstitutional, Barry called on Congress to “correct” what he perceives as their error and the libs give a standing ovation. To anyone but a lib lawyer, this was a clear breach of protocol, decorum, good manners and common sense. Though common sense seems rather uncommon in Washington these days.
No. He didn’t, if you bothered to listen.
He called on Congress to act to ameliorate some of the unintended consequences of the SC ruling. Like foreign corporations donating huge sums of cash to campaigns.
Or is that something you support?
A rather sanctimonious semantic rendition of the germain locution.
I did bother to listen.
“I don’t think American elections should be bankrolled by America’s most powerful interests or, worse, by foreign entities. They should be decided by the American people. And I urge Democrats and Republicans to pass a bill that helps correct some of these problems.”
He said nothing about Congress overruling the Supreme Court. He said that we have to adopt our rules to account for the consequences of the ruling.
Since I didn’t watch, can someone tell me if he grew horns?
Will unions then be exempt? Laundered cash from Hamas? I doubt it. That’s the only reason he has his knickers in a wad.
As has been alluded to, if he were observing deference to the separation of powers he would not have challenged and humiliated the court before the Congress and a national audience.
Alito’s “not true” was in response to this statement, and he was correct. The ruling had nothing to do with the Tillman act. It reversed substantial portions McCain Feingold, dealing specifically with broadcast ads, which obviously couldn’t be forseen in 1907.
The court ruled that M-F violated the first ammendment. As I understand it, the only way congress can correct this would be to ammend the constitution. Ain’t gonna happen.
funny michelle the baraky horror picture show…very appropriate…great job on Fox this morning…
that was just her tightened ligaments twitching. It’s irritating when a vulva is near your scapula.
Oh geez!!! I could have lived without that picture in my head. Scary.
chap,
You are intentionally or unintentionally missing the point. If Obama wants to disagree with the Supreme Court and make a move to introduce legislation that counters or clarifies the law he is more than happy to do so.
Obama in the State of the Union address had a chance to reset his role. Leader of ALL Americans, or partisan hack. Leader of a country or leftist socialist liberal who wants to force HIS agenda on us.
He, quite consistently mind you, chose to be the political partisan hack he is and will always be.
It good for “my” side of course. Not so good for the country.
Obama has no sense of context. He showed this same thing with the panty bomber.
The State of the Union address was not the time nor the place to criticize the court.
Interpetation: He won’t quit until this country has been transformed into the “socialist paradise” he envisions the country could be…with him in charge, of course.
An impossibility for a puppet.
A LOL inaccuracy.
an even bigger LOL inaccuracy.
ACCURATE – FIFY a teeny bit.
LOL – see above.
Accurate – another teeny FIFY.
Again, a puppet cannot make choices…any more than a pencil or a screwdriver can.
The latter statement completely negates the first!
It’s as if he’s saying Americans aren’t smart enough to decipher through campaign rhetoric and messaging to cast an informed ballot.
Statements like these really cast him as an elitist, intellectual snob who looks down on average Americans and that’s a shame.
we-heh-helllll then…let’s put Roe vs Wade up to the good people of the U S of A to decide, shall we?
Another night of Obama the Blame Caster.
Everybody’s fault except him. Meaningless drivel by Fearless leader, no class, no spine Constitutional Scholar, but the question that begs to be asked – What Countries Constitution, certainly not ours.
Thank you for the condescension, Chaps. It always serves to remind us of your fundamental leftism.
It wasn’t anger, on my part. It is revulsion, it is disgust, it is amazement (which, at this point is not easy to evoke)at how fundamentally ignorant this “smartest president” actually is. What he said was patently false. What he said was unprecedented (find a precedent, if you can). And, yes, he most assuredly did suggest that Congress can overrule a CONSTITUTIONAL doctrine announced by the CO-EQUAL branch of government whose role is to speak as the arbiter of what the Constitution says (absent amendment).
We now know a bit more about how vacant THE ONE’s conceit actually is, and how little respect he has for the rule of law. He isn’t even a good lawyer.
And, on the subject of foreign money flooding our political system, how many of us have forgotten…
OBAMA disabled all means of tracking from where in the world his contributions derived?
That is a scandal and a potential crime we cannot afford to forget.
http://townhall.com/Common/PrintPage.aspx?g=a565d8e3-4603-4c89-b031-385b02ab6b74&t=c
George Will provides the brown paper bag for the hyperventilating collectivists.
On January 28th, 2010 at 8:27 am, cabrerski said:
I can’t wait until a Quo Warranto case comes before SCOTUS regarding POTUS.
I saw the speech and I thought Obama was rude, mean, condenscending, and arrogant. He insulted those who do not believe in his politics. He insulted the Republican leadership in a forum where they are not allowed to speak back truth to power. He insulted and intimidated the Supreme Court in the same way. He disrespected our military brass with his in your face assertion about gays in the military.
He made false claims, false accusations. He rewrote history to satisfy his ambition while falsely claiming he had no ambition for himself. He came off as the only person in the world who has the intelligence to solve all our problems which is very conceited and arrogant.
He basically told the American people they were wrong and that he was going to continue doing the things he is doing no matter what they say. He was insinuating that they are just too stupid to understand and that the problem was he just didn’t explain it well enough.
He made stupid claims about ending the war in Iraq and safeguarding all nuclear material in 4 years. He stood civility on its head for this type of speech. He was combative, arrogant, insulting, and condenscending to anyone that does not believe the way he does.
He would insult Republicans, tell lies about them not offering any alternatives, and then say he wanted to work in a bipartisan manner, which is codeword for do it my way only. He is a sham, a scammer, a liar, and a fool. God help us all.
Not only was his behavior in that environment sickening, it was also scary that he would act that way. He is a very dangerous man with power who would intimidate, bully, lie, and abuse people to get his way while cloaking himself in a holier smarter than thou cloak of civility and bi-partisanship while feeling our pain.
Contrast that against the Republican response which was very articulate and positive without the mean spirited attacks on those whose beliefs are different. It was easy to spot the honest man between the two.
T-Bone,
Were you expecting anything else from the Narcissist in Chief?
Like hell it didn’t. The Tillman Act was the beginning of a long line of legislation that sought to limit the role of corporate interests in campaign financing.
The Court specifically ruled on McCain Feingold, but the implication of their ruling reaches far back and will have an effect not only on other campaign finance laws, but also other areas of federal law that one may not even consider. For example, a few years back the First Circuit ruled that corporations do not have the right to invoke the Fifth Amendement right against self-incrimination. What does that ruling mean now?
He is not talking about defying the Court decision. He is talking about making sure that the unintended consequences of this ruling are dealt with.
Fine. I am willing to concede that all these were contrived on your part.
No, it wasn’t, as I have shown several times.
No. He didn’t. What he proposed is no different than what occurs in conservative states whenever a new abortion ruling is handed down. They amend their laws to narrowly conform to the new decision while trying to minimize the impact of it.
Chaps, tell it to the people…like the several scholars on both right and left…that call THE ONE out on his BS. I’d provide you links, but I have to earn a living.
I don’t have time or patience to mess with such stupidity in the face of reality. It is one of those things that distinguishes the collectivist mind-set; a refusal to deal with reality.
Parting thought question for those capable of thought: if a corporation can be criminally liable, why is it not afforded 5th amendment protections? Why not strip it of 4th amendment protections, too? How about the 8th?
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703410004575029491921019032.html
Hondurans boo US.
Reset…fully justified.
Heck uv a job, Barry…
Chappy is acting like the decision gutted every other campaign finance law on the books. Of course it didn’t. And Chappy doesn’t seem to care that some corporations and legal entities are treated differently. For example, unions can and have spent huge sums in recent, post-McCain-Feingold, election cycles. And “the media” however that is defined is exempt. But if Ford or ExxonMobil couldn’t before this decision. If 5 of my friends wanted to run an ad within 30 or 60 days of an election, we couldn’t before this decision.
If this decision introduced some ambiguity on other legislation and other decisions then the courts will work this out over time. This is exactly the way the system is supposed to work.
And it is supremely ironic that Obama should be complaining about “foreign contributions” to campaigns. Like I said in another thread, Obama is the epitome of crass hypocrisy…
I did not say the Supreme Court decision was wrong. From what I know about the case law, it probably is right. That was not my point.
My points were that:
1) I certainly think he has the right to disagree with the Supremes on a very public forum; and
2)it is absurd and clearly partisan to say Obama was lying when he said it turned back a century of law. It did. You can happen to think that century of law was wrong. But it was there.
Of course it didn’t, which is why I never said anything close to that.
So your concerns are simply limited to the Tillman decision of 1907?
No. It simply proves that, despite the popular meme here, Obama was not lying when he said it overturned 100 years of law.
I very much doubt anyone would assert otherwise.
But a “right” to publicly disagree (i.e., free speech) in a public forum with the highest court never approaches making it right to intentionally expose Justices…sitting in the chamber surrounded by hooting Dimocrats, and unable to respond…to the kind of behavior displayed by Sen. Schumer.
I think most Americans…certainly this one…saw it as outright thuggery, and a facial attempt to put the Justices in their place.
Couple that to the grossly demagogic misstatement of what the decision meant, and I think THE ONE owes the Court, and America in general, an apology.
Not.
Holding.
Breath.
This is why Hillary was out of town.
BTW, fisticuffs may have been in order, and I think Alito could take Obama.
I’m afraid that after Schmucky Schumer leaned over me to clap in my ear, I’d just naturally get up and slap the dog-spit out of him.
But that’s me.
I think a walk-out was in order, and I’d be surprised to see the full panel of Justices in a venue with THE ONE.
You clearly do not understand what the ruling did. I posted this on another thread, but it is applicable here.
The Supreme Court struck down the entirety of 441(b), which covered both foreign and domestic corporations. The court did not rule on whether or not the state has a compelling interest in limiting the speech of foreign or foreign controlled corporations. It just said the current law was overbroad because it included both foreign and domestic. Assuming, though the State does have such a compelling interest with respect to foreign corporations does, guess what has to happen now?
I will give you a minute or two….
CONGRESS HAS TO PASS A LAW LIMITED STRICTLY TO FOREIGN CORPORATIONS!!!
WHICH IS EXACTLY WHAT OBAMA ASKED THEM TO DO!!!
It has nothing to do with overruling the Supreme Court decision because the Supreme Court specifically didn’t rule on the issue of foreign corporations. It simply struck down the law that covered them because it also covered domestic corps.
Except you have not demonstrated that the Citizens United decision did overturn 100 years of law. You have stated that you fear it might. But that is not what he stated.
What specific sections of the decision to you think overturns Tillman?
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/09pdf/08-205.pdf
Um. No. It unequivocally did.
You are confusing my argument against the notion that Obama lied with my argument that Obama is not asking Congress to overturn the ruling, but rather to deal with the consequences of it.
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/77293-schumer-calls-for-hearings-on-un-american-court-decision
http://blog.timesunion.com/nypotomac/schumer-blasts-supreme-court-campaign-finance-ruling/419/
Geez, Chaps, you’d think nobody here can put stuff in context…
We all know what THE ONE meant.
If it was about plugging a new loop-hole caused by the decision, it wouldn’t have made it into the first draft of the SOTU.
Puhleeeeze…
Tillman may not even be the applicable law right now. Doesn’t matter. The point is that ever since that law, we have sought to limit corporation’s campaign contributions by treating them as a separate class. Until January 21st, that is.
Thanks, Rags, for linking to two articles which prove my point. Neither of them say a thing about overruling the Supreme Court’s decision.
It is talking about passing legislation to minimize the impact of it. Like reinstating a ban on foreign corporations. Or perhaps making sure that corporations cannot now skirt certain limits which would apply to anyone by simply setting up dummy subsidiaries.
If you cannot see how this decision leads to a whole host of issues that now need to be addressed legislatively, whether you agree with the ruling or not, then brother, I don’t know what to say.
Um…the foreign corporation issue is not a loop hole. It is a huge f-ing gap.
Waste.
Of.
Time.
You are absolutely correct. Because you either have no understanding of the implications decision or you do and are simply being disingenuous.