Obama Calls for Amendment Limiting Free-Speech Rights

[JoeB131]

What about the Muslim who refused to serve alchohol on the plane. If she isn't fired for it then the lady who refused to marry gays shouldn't be fired either. BTW they both should be fired not jailed.

Not even close. assuming that the Airline didn't fire him, that's kind of their perogative as a private company not to do so. This is a public official refusing to carry out a court order.

 

[Avorysuds]

Corporations are not people and bribing politicians is not free speech

As it was mentioned before, then Unions need to be stopped from this as well.

 

[Avorysuds]

The Founding Fathers wanted to limit corporations and never consider them persons, for the very reason that we see today...Government overly influenced by corporate interest....

And how do you feel about Unions doing this? Do you think the FF wanted Unions corrupting the Government?

 

[The Rabbi]

You have to wonder what Democrats are so scared of that they are constantly demonizing Citizens and trying to overturn it. After all, it gives them the same ability to form corporations and campaign on issues as conservatives. Perhaps it is that Democrats already have all the corporations campaigning for them so anything else must be going to the opposition.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

There are plenty of other things that require attention before this.

I am afraid that Obama shows himself to be less and less a liberal....

And more a left wing Hitler.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

You have to wonder what Democrats are so scared of that they are constantly demonizing Citizens and trying to overturn it. After all, it gives them the same ability to form corporations and campaign on issues as conservatives. Perhaps it is that Democrats already have all the corporations campaigning for them so anything else must be going to the opposition.

I don't agree with Citizens either.

But an amendment isn't the answer.

Seems like voters educating themselves (and not listening to the Hacks who run the communications networks) would weaken the power of money.

 

[bripat9643]

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

Oh My Fucking God! He can't be serious. Obama has finally revealed his Stalinist cloven hoof. That all we need is some government agency deciding which organizations are allowed to speak and which aren't.

How much do you want to bet the Michael Moore would never be told he couldn't release one of his piles of offal right before an election?

 

[frigidweirdo]

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

You mean he wants an amendment that brings democracy to the US?

No, he is calling for an amendment that gives his party an unfair advantage over his opponents.

How does it provide an unfair advantage exactly? Because big money is less likely to buy Democrats then Republic? Not really, they'll pay who ever is in charge to get them to do what they want. Defense will give to both as will health services and just about any other.

The point being that as long as big money controls politicians, then what will change?

Nothing. it's not democracy.

 

[frigidweirdo]

You have to wonder what Democrats are so scared of that they are constantly demonizing Citizens and trying to overturn it. After all, it gives them the same ability to form corporations and campaign on issues as conservatives. Perhaps it is that Democrats already have all the corporations campaigning for them so anything else must be going to the opposition.

I don't agree with Citizens either.

But an amendment isn't the answer.

Seems like voters educating themselves (and not listening to the Hacks who run the communications networks) would weaken the power of money.

But then again that's not going to happen, is it? Look at how many people are taken in by advertising, McDonalds, Pepsi, Coca-Cola being some of the bigger ones. They make a fortune because they mind control so many people.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

You have to wonder what Democrats are so scared of that they are constantly demonizing Citizens and trying to overturn it. After all, it gives them the same ability to form corporations and campaign on issues as conservatives. Perhaps it is that Democrats already have all the corporations campaigning for them so anything else must be going to the opposition.

I don't agree with Citizens either.

But an amendment isn't the answer.

Seems like voters educating themselves (and not listening to the Hacks who run the communications networks) would weaken the power of money.

But then again that's not going to happen, is it? Look at how many people are taken in by advertising, McDonalds, Pepsi, Coca-Cola being some of the bigger ones. They make a fortune because they mind control so many people.

Then just what the hell do you think you are doing ?

Saving them from who so they can listen to who ?

If they are that stupid, they deserve what they get.

 

[Kondor3]

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

Hell...

Let's go one step further...

Let's frame a Constitutional Amendment, preventing corporations and businesses (including unions, nonprofits, etc.) from donating ANY money to politicians and political campaigns, and revoking their charters for engaging in any kind of political activity within a carefully-defined framework...

That should help to take the wind out of Corporate America's sails, when trying to buy our elected officials and lawmakers...

One of the few times that Obumble has actually come-up with a good idea...

When do we start?

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Even with the weak opposition fronted by the current Republicans, the chances of Obama getting a constitutional amendment of any kind are equivalent to the chances of E.T crawling out of Hillary's anal orifice and giving a speech on the merits of garlic-infused strawberries in the voice of Winston Churchill.

I mean, really.

 

[BluesLegend]

Obama is a liar and I hate liars.

Well, there goes your love affairs with Rush. LOL

You seem desperate...for attention its sad really.

 

[bripat9643]

You have to wonder what Democrats are so scared of that they are constantly demonizing Citizens and trying to overturn it. After all, it gives them the same ability to form corporations and campaign on issues as conservatives. Perhaps it is that Democrats already have all the corporations campaigning for them so anything else must be going to the opposition.

I don't agree with Citizens either.

But an amendment isn't the answer.

Seems like voters educating themselves (and not listening to the Hacks who run the communications networks) would weaken the power of money.

But then again that's not going to happen, is it? Look at how many people are taken in by advertising, McDonalds, Pepsi, Coca-Cola being some of the bigger ones. They make a fortune because they mind control so many people.

People who go to McDonald's aren't "taken in." They know what they're buying. You seem to be admitting that you're a gullible dupe who needs to be protected from himself.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Good. Money isn't speech

What about art and music? Are they speech?

 

[bripat9643]

"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.

Where does the First Amendment mention people with regard to free speech?

 

[bripat9643]

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

Hell...

Let's go one step further...

Let's frame a Constitutional Amendment, preventing corporations and businesses (including unions, nonprofits, etc.) from donating ANY money to politicians and political campaigns, and revoking their charters for engaging in any kind of political activity within a carefully-defined framework...

That should help to take the wind out of Corporate America's sails, when trying to buy our elected officials and lawmakers...

One of the few times that Obumble has actually come-up with a good idea...

When do we start?

Let's not. Obama is a Stalinist, and I can't imagine a worse idea.

 

[frigidweirdo]

You have to wonder what Democrats are so scared of that they are constantly demonizing Citizens and trying to overturn it. After all, it gives them the same ability to form corporations and campaign on issues as conservatives. Perhaps it is that Democrats already have all the corporations campaigning for them so anything else must be going to the opposition.

I don't agree with Citizens either.

But an amendment isn't the answer.

Seems like voters educating themselves (and not listening to the Hacks who run the communications networks) would weaken the power of money.

But then again that's not going to happen, is it? Look at how many people are taken in by advertising, McDonalds, Pepsi, Coca-Cola being some of the bigger ones. They make a fortune because they mind control so many people.

Then just what the hell do you think you are doing ?

Saving them from who so they can listen to who ?

If they are that stupid, they deserve what they get.

There's stupid and there's ignorance.

Stupid is not knowing what to do with the information you have, or making bad choices, ignorance is not knowing stuff.

Both can be helped through education, the former by teaching people how to make better judgement, not all can do it, but many will improve their decision making, while ignorance is helped by learning stuff.

It's called EDUCATION and the US seems to be failing on that one.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

You have to wonder what Democrats are so scared of that they are constantly demonizing Citizens and trying to overturn it. After all, it gives them the same ability to form corporations and campaign on issues as conservatives. Perhaps it is that Democrats already have all the corporations campaigning for them so anything else must be going to the opposition.

I don't agree with Citizens either.

But an amendment isn't the answer.

Seems like voters educating themselves (and not listening to the Hacks who run the communications networks) would weaken the power of money.

But then again that's not going to happen, is it? Look at how many people are taken in by advertising, McDonalds, Pepsi, Coca-Cola being some of the bigger ones. They make a fortune because they mind control so many people.

Then just what the hell do you think you are doing ?

Saving them from who so they can listen to who ?

If they are that stupid, they deserve what they get.

No need to amend anything then.

Just educate people.


There's stupid and there's ignorance.

Stupid is not knowing what to do with the information you have, or making bad choices, ignorance is not knowing stuff.

Both can be helped through education, the former by teaching people how to make better judgement, not all can do it, but many will improve their decision making, while ignorance is helped by learning stuff.

It's called EDUCATION and the US seems to be failing on that one.

 

[Dana7360]

"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

A company isn't a human being and money isn't speech.

I am most certainly in support of going BACK to the law not recognizing a company as a human.

For over 200 years companies weren't human beings. Now, the conservatives on the supreme court have ruled that a company is human and has the right to spend as much money as they want on ads and politics without much of any oversight or disclosure.

If they're humans then they should have to follow the same laws as us humans.