Obama, this weekend, wants folks to know that he is angry and intends to double-down on his bully-agenda against the American people and the private sector business community. And the people say, "Bring it on !!" We include the headline and opening comments from a news story in the Wall Street Journal over the weekend. This past week, the Supreme Court reversed a 1907 law in deciding that corporations have the same free speech rights as do individuals - since they are made up of, ahhhh, INDIVIDUALS !!!!!!!!
Why are the Dems so upset with this decision? Obama hates the thing and some in Congress have even called the decision "unAmerican" !!!
The problem? Well, for one thing, 'corporations'" own talk radio. This decision makes it much more difficult for the Marxist Administration to ban free speech on conservative talk radio - an unfulfilled goal of the Lefties. THAT is the cause of their great anger.
Understand that under current law, pre-Supreme Court ruling, disallows certain campaign ads within 60 days of a national election for all except the [Democrat controlled] Marxist Media. In recent election cycles, the print media ran "news stories" that favored the Democrat pundit by a ratio of 7 to 3 -------- 7 stories favoring Democrat candidates and only 3 negative stories. The Dems are angry because this advantage has now been lost.
It is not just talk radio that has benefited from this recent court decision. The business community has been given new political power, as well.
In a related story, Bloomberg financial reporting tells us that 77% of the high dollar business community sees Obama as anti-business. Obama has spent the first year of his term in office doing little than spend money, blame Bush and demonize the business/banking community and free market capitalist principles for the "financial mess we are in." Obama has invested in an aggressive campaign opposing the business community and has caused them great harm. Now, they have been told their corporations are allowed to fight back by supporting aggressive political campaigns defending themselves and pressing for change in Washington.
While Obama whines about this legal decision, he forgets to remind the audience that his campaign benefited hugely from corporate gifts and is currently in bed with companies such as GE, IBM, BP, and hundreds of others. What he has not been able to subdue is talk radio and, now, his plans to do so are in serious doubt.
In the associated news blurb, we have something of the administration's angst against this court decision and options they believe are available to "reverse" this decision. Over the weekend, in Obama's criticism of the Supreme Court, he pretended to be supportive of the Constitution. Understand that any "remedies" being tossed about by the anti-Constitution crowd are months and years away from being put into law. Such will not happen this year. The Court's decision has changed the landscape for the funding of the approaching mid-term Congressional elections, empowering conservatives as well as the much maligned business and banking communities. Obama enjoyed the ability to threaten a rather defenseless banking industry. Now, they have been given the legal ammunition to fight back.
From the Wall Street Journal:
By JESS BRAVIN And BRODY MULLINS
WASHINGTON—Democrats are exploring ways to counter a Supreme Court ruling that threw out a century of limits on corporate political spending, hoping it will hand them a populist issue to stem a Republican tide rising on public anger.
President Barack Obama devoted his weekly address to the decision, calling it a victory for "special interests and their lobbyists." He cited "one of the great Republican presidents, Teddy Roosevelt," who "warned of the impact of unbridled, corporate spending" on elections.
Possible legislation includes requiring corporations to obtain shareholder approval before funding political advertisements and blocking companies from deducting election spending as a business expense on their taxes.
Another proposal, borrowed from existing rules for political candidates, is requiring "the CEO of the corporation to make a declaration at the end of an ad saying, 'I'm the CEO of X Corp. and I approved this ad,' " said Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D., Md.), who heads the House Democrats' campaign committee.
*********
There you have it: they are mad and determined to take back the advantage they have just lost. With the coming mid-term elections in mind, we might be looking at a developing "perfect storm" against the Democrat Radicals currently in power. It is increasing apparent that the Dems have decided to ignore the Massachusetts election as well as all the polling results showing popular displeasure for the Administration's policies including health care and terrorism. Hey, he ignored the Tea Party demonstrations and the Town Hall protests, so why not pretend all is well in the campaign wars of recent months? The march over the cliff continues to be the preferred path for these people. Couldn't happen to nicer group of politicians !!
.
No comments:
Post a Comment