Filed under: Capitalism, Democrat Corruption, Economy, Election 2012, Foreign Policy, Health Care, National Security, Politics, Taxes | Tags: Mitt Romney, Paul Ryan, President Barack Obama
Filed under: Capitalism, Democrat Corruption, Economy, Election 2012, Freedom, Politics, Progressivism, Statism, The United States | Tags: Citizens United Decision, Freedom of Speech, U.S.Supreme Court
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Democrats do not like disagreement, so the Supreme Court’s 2010 “Citizens United” decision which knocked down curbs on companies’ political donations that fuel political free speech, is something they really hate. During the Supreme Court’s hearing, an Obama-appointed lawyer said the law could be used to ban political movies or books. The court’s five to four decision brought howls of protest from Democrats, who get a larger proportion of their donations from unions and professionals, but not so much from corporations
Corporations still cannot donate directly to candidates, but they can donate to political action committees (PACs).
Attempting to distract attention from the Republican convention where multitudes of speakers were disagreeing with his policies, President Barack Obama tried to regain the limelight with a call for a constitutional amendment to amend the free-speech rights of wealthy people and corporations. Thy hypocrisy here is breathtaking. Democrats excoriate the Libertarian Koch brothers who head Koch Industries, yet make no mention of George Soros and the Democracy Alliance, and welcome the funds public sector unions extract from their membership.
“I think we need to seriously consider mobilizing a constitutional amendment process to overturn Citizens United. … Even if the amendment process falls short, it can shine a spotlight of the super PAC phenomenon and help apply pressure for change,” Obama said during 4:30 p.m. EST online event.
The publicity-grabbing gambit complements his campaign-theme portrayal of himself as the defender of middle-class Americans, and Gov. Mitt Romney as the champion of wealthy, job-exporting plutocrats.
Those “super PACs “fundamentally threaten to overwhelm the political process over the long run and drown out the voice of ordinary citizens,” he claimed, as many of his 2008 Wall Street Donors are supporting Mitt Romney.
Filed under: Democrat Corruption, Domestic Policy, Election 2012, Media Bias, News the Media Doesn't Want You to Hear, Politics, The United States | Tags: "Code Words", The Politics of Patronage, What is Racism?
Democrats don’t like disagreement. And they have been quick to disagree (It’s only people who disagree with them, not their disagreement that is the problem) with every assertion by every speaker, and their venom rises with the success of the speaker.
The liberal loons at MSNBC have hauled out their “code book” to identify everything with which they disagree as “racist,” Words spoken by Republicans are actually “code,” racist words meant to do something or other that is racist. “Welfare” is an obvious racist word, although there are more whites than blacks on welfare, “Food stamps” is another racist word. Whoever first called Barack Obama “the food-stamp” president because the numbers of people on food-stamps has climbed so dramatically, was apparently making a “racist” comment. For what purpose? To get people to notice that Barack Obama is an African-American? Was anyone unaware of that? “Chicago” is racist, “PGA Tour” is racist. “Golf” is racist. “Work requirement” is racist. Criticism of President Obama’s policies is racist. If such “code words” are racist — what is the result supposed to be? I don’t get it.
Chris Matthews went on a lengthy rant against RNC Chairman Reince Priebus in which he actually said that President Obama” has an African name, and he’s got to live with it.” What?
Immigration over the years has brought many unfamiliar names to America. They’re interesting, sometimes unpronounceable, like — Reince Priebus. We learn to pronounce different names. Celebrities have largely quit changing their names into more “regular” Anglo-Saxon names. Middle Eastern names are newest for us, and still difficult. Chinese names put the last name first in our terms. Indonesian and Vietnamese names are sometimes hard, because unfamiliar. I’ve never had anyone be offended if I ask how to pronounce their name, and people often ask how to pronounce my name. But racist?
The question becomes why are you so conscious of race? Is not that over-attention to supposed “code words” racist itself? How about MSNBC carefully refusing to broadcast coverage of any ethnic minority who appeared on a Republican stage?