Obama Calls for Amendment Limiting Free-Speech Rights

[Geaux4it]

I recall 'Her Thighness Clinton' calling for this as well.

Seems Obama is going after the Constitution again

-Geaux
-------------------------------
(CNSNews.com) –President Barack Obama endorsed a constitutional amendment that would restrict the free-speech rights of political activist groups by overturning the Supreme Court decision in the landmark Citizens United v FEC case that granted First Amendment rights to corporations.

“Over the longer term, I think we need to seriously consider mobilizing a constitutional amendment process to overturn Citizens United,” Obama wrote during a question and answer session on the website Reddit on Wednesday.

“Even if the amendment process falls short, it can shine a spotlight of the super-PAC phenomenon and help apply pressure for change.”

In its decision, the Supreme Court said that the government could not restrict the free-speech rights of organizations during elections, striking down key provisions of the McCain-Feingold campaign finance law.

That law restricted how much money independent political organizations could spend and banned them from engaging in election-related speech 60 days prior to a general election.

Obama Calls for Amendment Limiting Free-Speech Rights

 

[PaintMyHouse]

"President Barack Obama endorsed a constitutional amendment that would restrict the free-speech rights of political activist groups by overturning the Supreme Court decision in the landmark Citizens United v FEC case that granted First Amendment rights to corporations."

Good. Money isn't speech, and corporations aren't people. Not all that difficult to understand if you think about it, which you don't.

 

[Geaux4it]

"President Barack Obama endorsed a constitutional amendment that would restrict the free-speech rights of political activist groups by overturning the Supreme Court decision in the landmark Citizens United v FEC case that granted First Amendment rights to corporations."

Good. Money isn't speech, and corporations aren't people. Not all that difficult to understand if you think about it, which you don't.

So, you're in favor (not surprised) preventing a company from airing commercials endorsing a candidate? No editorials etc,,, books....... you get my drift

Scary stuff

-Geaux

 

[PaintMyHouse]

"President Barack Obama endorsed a constitutional amendment that would restrict the free-speech rights of political activist groups by overturning the Supreme Court decision in the landmark Citizens United v FEC case that granted First Amendment rights to corporations."

Good. Money isn't speech, and corporations aren't people. Not all that difficult to understand if you think about it, which you don't.

So, you're in favor (not surprised) preventing a company for airing commercials endorsing a candidate? No editorials etc,,, books....... you get my drift

Scary stuff

-Geaux

Not really. It's American history actually, when we used to have much better elections, and much better politics.

 

[MisterBeale]

I understand the problem this is meant to address, but this is just some scary ass shit. Messing with the First Amendment is NOT something we ever need to do.

I think a better solution would be to just have publicly funded elections, and make all other electioneering illegal. If they can ban tobacco advertising and liquor advertising, then they can ban campaign advertising. It is just as simple as that. It isn't a matter of free speech, it's a matter of conflicts of interests and cleaning the corruption up out of the system.

If the courts want to allow issue advocacy, they should allow it six months before or six months after an election. The time period just proceeding should be viewed as "campaigning" and thus be reserved for publicly funded campaign cash. The electorate is too easily manipulated by TV, radio, and print ads. They have no minds of their own. Propaganda is too effective. This is not a freedom of speech issue, thus, no amendment is necessary. These pols and interest groups should keep their filthy hands off of my civil rights and liberties.

If you have a cause, educate the electorate through social media like everyone else, early and often. Use your money there and start a campaign and a movement. But stay out of TV, radio, and print ads.

 

[depotoo]

So, I guess he would include unions, and super pacs such as his own was, as well? Not likely.
Quit messing with the Constitution, period.

 

[JoeB131]

The transfer of wealth isn't speech.

 

[Mac1958]

Corporations are tax treatment statuses for the purposes of tax law. They are documents with all kinds of numbers the feds want to see.

People are people.

Not the same.
.

 

[Camp]

So, I guess he would include unions, and super pacs such as his own was, as well? Not likely.
Quit messing with the Constitution, period.

That is just a speculation you are making with absolutely no support for it's accuracy or truth other than your fantasy and mission to mislead and misinform.

 

[PredFan]

"President Barack Obama endorsed a constitutional amendment that would restrict the free-speech rights of political activist groups by overturning the Supreme Court decision in the landmark Citizens United v FEC case that granted First Amendment rights to corporations."

Good. Money isn't speech, and corporations aren't people. Not all that difficult to understand if you think about it, which you don't.

Then ban Trade Unions from contributions. Money isn't speech, and unions aren't people. Not at all difficult to understand if you think about it, which you don't.

Of course being an idiot hack, and unions being democrat supporters, you won't agree with this.

 

[Camp]

Why are suckers who have a need to support billionaires in the quest for more obscene wealth so easy to brainwash.

 

[depotoo]

So, I guess he would include unions, and super pacs such as his own was, as well? Not likely.
Quit messing with the Constitution, period.

That is just a speculation you are making with absolutely no support for it's accuracy or truth other than your fantasy and mission to mislead and misinform.

Right. Fantasy land is where you must reside. Not once, ever, have I heard Obama, or any Dem elected officials state they want the unions to quit supporting them, because it should be illegal, as they have with Citizen's United. Try again.

 

[Wildman]

...this is just some scary ass shit. Messing with the First Amendment is NOT something we ever need to do.

O'Husseinbama wants to rewrite it so that only libercommies have the right to ANY speech!!

 

[Wildman]

The transfer of wealth isn't speech.

did anyone say there was ?

 

[Slyhunter]

"President Barack Obama endorsed a constitutional amendment that would restrict the free-speech rights of political activist groups by overturning the Supreme Court decision in the landmark Citizens United v FEC case that granted First Amendment rights to corporations."

Good. Money isn't speech, and corporations aren't people. Not all that difficult to understand if you think about it, which you don't.

But you don't say that about labor unions.
hypocrite.

 

[Camp]

So, I guess he would include unions, and super pacs such as his own was, as well? Not likely.
Quit messing with the Constitution, period.

That is just a speculation you are making with absolutely no support for it's accuracy or truth other than your fantasy and mission to mislead and misinform.

Right. Fantasy land is where you must reside. Not once, ever, have I heard Obama, or any Dem elected officials state they want the unions to quit supporting them, because it should be illegal, as they have with Citizen's United. Try again.

I don't really care what Obama and the Democrats want. I have no problems with Unions and others being restricted the same way corporations and billionaires should be restricted.

 

[depotoo]

So, that is admission you have never heard them mention it either. Thank you.
Oh, and your cut off would be billionaires, not millionaires, then? Or super pacs, if they don't include billionaires, then.

So, I guess he would include unions, and super pacs such as his own was, as well? Not likely.
Quit messing with the Constitution, period.

That is just a speculation you are making with absolutely no support for it's accuracy or truth other than your fantasy and mission to mislead and misinform.

Right. Fantasy land is where you must reside. Not once, ever, have I heard Obama, or any Dem elected officials state they want the unions to quit supporting them, because it should be illegal, as they have with Citizen's United. Try again.

I don't really care what Obama and the Democrats want. I have no problems with Unions and others being restricted the same way corporations and billionaires should be restricted.

 

[PredFan]

So, I guess he would include unions, and super pacs such as his own was, as well? Not likely.
Quit messing with the Constitution, period.

That is just a speculation you are making with absolutely no support for it's accuracy or truth other than your fantasy and mission to mislead and misinform.

Right. Fantasy land is where you must reside. Not once, ever, have I heard Obama, or any Dem elected officials state they want the unions to quit supporting them, because it should be illegal, as they have with Citizen's United. Try again.

I don't really care what Obama and the Democrats want. I have no problems with Unions and others being restricted the same way corporations and billionaires should be restricted.

That is fine and admirable, but that isn't what Obama wants to do. And that is what this thread is about.

 

[Camp]

So, I guess he would include unions, and super pacs such as his own was, as well? Not likely.
Quit messing with the Constitution, period.

That is just a speculation you are making with absolutely no support for it's accuracy or truth other than your fantasy and mission to mislead and misinform.

Right. Fantasy land is where you must reside. Not once, ever, have I heard Obama, or any Dem elected officials state they want the unions to quit supporting them, because it should be illegal, as they have with Citizen's United. Try again.

I don't really care what Obama and the Democrats want. I have no problems with Unions and others being restricted the same way corporations and billionaires should be restricted.

That is fine and admirable, but that isn't what Obama wants to do. And that is what this thread is about.

Obama wants the topic to be an issue that gets attention. He is not the one who would write a new amendment. That task is open to all sides to wrestle with. With the length of time it takes to pass an amendment it would not be Obama that signed the new amendment into law.
For me this is an example of Obama derangement and hate getting in the way of doing what is best for the country.

 

[rightwinger]

Corporations are not people and bribing politicians is not free speech