The Supreme Court unwittingly put the Marxist Dems in great disadvantage for the coming midterm elections - as if they didn't have enough trouble.

There he is, our friendly demagog, Charles Schumer. This is the guy who pronounced the death of family values and a strong foreign policy with the election of Obama - Schumer was bragging.

When word got out that the Supreme had made a decison in favor of Citizens United, this editor was all smiles. The Obama Administration had spent an entire year demonizing Wall Street while protecting its own in Fannie and Freddie. In late fall, of last year, Bloomberg Financial took a survey of Wall Street executives and CEO's. They found that 77 % of those surveyed believed that Obama was actually anti-business. No problem for Obama until "Citizens United." The Citizens United Supreme Court decision found that corporate political speech was protected speech, under the Constitution.

After 12 months of blatant class warfare, a grand Marxist strategy, those who had been demonized were told that they could now fight back. And Obama got angry. In his State of the Union address, the classless Obama attacked the Supreme Court to their face, in front of God and everybody. Charlie Schumer made it clear that the Democrat congress would address this "injustice" and correct the problem. It was obvious that the Dems had to do something and do it fast or the wrath of the corporate world was about to be unleashed against them. Its called payback.

That legislative "solution" is now being drafted and the effects of this new law, should it become law, is not nearly what the Dems need it to be.

Politico gives us this information: "While most Democrats, including Obama, decried the Citizens United ruling as giving unprecedented power to corporations, in particular, to influence elections, most Republican and conservative leaders largely celebrated it as a victory for the First Amendment.

The GOP-allied U.S. Chamber of Commerce — which filed a brief in the case supporting Citizens United and has announced plans to for its largest and most aggressive election campaign in its history targeting congressional Democrats — attacked the legislation Thursday as “nothing more than a brazen attempt to tilt the playing field in favor of the incumbent party in this fall’s elections, silence constitutionally protected speech, and abridge First Amendment rights.”

Noting that Van Hollen heads the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and Schumer recently ran the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, Chamber President and CEO Tom Donohue has pointed out that Democrats are expected to endure substantial losses in the midterm elections and said “nothing in this ill-conceived and one-sided piece of legislation would change that. We will fight any and all attempts to muzzle and or demonize independent voices from the election discussion.” end of text.

That is the opinion of the targets of this law. But those who support it are unhappy, as well. While the bill's author, Chuckie Schumer admits that the purpose of the bill is to limit campaign spending by those who would seek his party's defeat, he could not write a bill that is so specific as to limit his enemies without limiting all fit similar legal definitions. The environmentalists, as a result, are complaining that the bill will cut funding for their pet projects as well. Even the Marxist guided Service Employees International Union expressed displeasure for the bill. Few are happy and many think the bill to be poorly written. Midknight Review believes the bill will do little to change the outcome of the midterms and, even, the 2012 presidential election. --- jds