Obama slams torrent of cash swamping US polls

[ProSense]

Source: AFP

BOWIE, Maryland (AFP) – President Barack Obama Thursday hit out at a wave of private and foreign cash swamping the US mid-term election campaign, urging backers to fight millions of dollars with millions of voices.

Obama stepped up his attack on the flood of outside money, often from unidentifiable sources and much of it financing opposition Republicans as they try to recapture Congress, pouring into races across the country.

"It could be the oil companies. It could be the insurance industry. It could be Wall Street. You don't know. Their lips are sealed. The floodgates are open, though," Obama said at a Democratic campaign rally in Maryland.

"Almost every one of these independent organizations is run by Republican operatives. They're posing as nonprofit, non-political groups," Obama said in his most outspoken attack yet on special interest cash.



Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20101007/pl_afp/usvotepoliticsobama_20101007220847

[AlinPA]

1. W. PA is swamped with ads by "groups" supporting Toomey. The Chamber of Commerce and

Club For Growth are the only ones with familiar names; the others are made up "groups', some funded by the Kochs. There are no commercials for products or services - it's 90% Toomey. It is rare to see a Sestak ad. This is the most political advertsing that I have ever seen.

[CLANG]

2. He's right you know.... (n/t)

[elehhhhna]

3. if we had a majority we could make a LAW!

[defendandprotect]

4. Guess it's time to do something, eh? Election reform? Campaign Finance Reform?

Public funding of campaigns where public dictates where, when and how our elections go!

Free TV air time and radio ad -- and debates freed from the control of private corporation!!

[Enthusiast]

14. I'm all for doing something.

What we have now is a total disaster. Unsustainable. Unsustainable, unless the American people actually believe corporate government is the correct path. Maybe a few more oil spills, outbreaks of poison food or deadly harmful prescription drugs will change hearts and minds.

[defendandprotect]

18. Only the weak brained would have confidence still in corporations as our saviors --

problem is, they now have such broad control over government and courts -- and elected

officials -- that the situation continues to worsen every day -- from Global Warming to

the arrival of "third world America."

Maybe a few more oil spills, outbreaks of poison food or deadly harmful prescription drugs will change hearts and minds.

Cast my vote for prevention -- and I continue to be shocked at how many here aren't dismayed

that Obama will continue with off-shore drilling!


:)

[laureloak]

5. Is it possible to impeach the supreme court?

[defendandprotect]

19. You can impeach judges -- there's a trial going on in USHR right now ....

Don't know that we have ever impeaced a SC justice, but certainly it could be done.

The right wing were trying to impeach Earl Warren for decades!!

[Turbineguy]

6. I look at it as a stimulus program.

But paid for by the rich and idiots.

[Name removed]

7. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[AndyTiedye]

8. The Insurance Companies Have More Money Than God

Buying elections is now a legitimate cost of business, so they can just spend whatever it takes to saturate the airwaves with their point of view and raise their rates as high as they want to cover it.

[and-justice-for-all]

9. "Foreign cash?? That should be a federal crime...

All of this is possible thanks to the SCOTUS!

[Skink]

10. People are going to be pissed when they find out the yearly dividends were lowered because of it.

[TomCADem]

11. Justice Alito Was So Pissed That Obama Called The Court On This Decision...

...and as President Obama predicted, Democracy is crushed under hundreds of millions of corporate cash that is untraceable to the sources.

[lonestarnot]

16. Mr. Grimace is not ashamed of destroying democracy or the United States. He cares only for his

power and the unitary executive powers. If grimacing by judicial staff can get staff thrown out of Court, why can't grimacing at a State of the Union address get one tossed from the address?

[Zorra]

12. A Presidential Order overruling SCOTUS is necessary in the interests of national security.

End of story.

[DFLforever]

13. That's not legal.

We will need a constitutional amendment.

[Zorra]

15. So, are these Executive Orders legal?

PROHIBITING TRANSACTIONS WITH TERRORISTS WHO THREATEN TO DISRUPT THE MIDDLE EAST PEACE PROCESS 22 Aug 98
EO 13107 IMPLEMENTATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS TREATIES 10 Dec 98
EO 13129 BLOCKING PROPERTY AND PROHIBITING TRANSACTIONS WITH THE TALIBAN 4 July 99
EO 13224 BLOCKING PROPERTY AND PROHIBITING TRANSACTIONS WITH PERSONS WHO COMMIT, THREATEN TO COMMIT, OR SUPPORT TERRORISM 23 Sept 01
EO 13228 ESTABLISHING THE OFFICE OF HOMELAND SECURITY AND THE HOMELAND SECURITY COUNCIL 8 Oct 01
EO 13231 CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE PROTECTION IN THE INFORMATION AGE 16 Oct 01
EO 13233 FURTHER IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PRESIDENTIAL RECORDS ACT 1 Nov 01 revoked by EO 13489
Military Order of 11/13/01 DETENTION, TREATMENT, AND TRIAL OF CERTAIN NON-CITIZENS IN THE WAR AGAINST TERRORISM

Legal or not, the process of determining the legality could have many beneficial ramifications, particularly if the EO is presented under the auspices of being an issue of national security and deterring terrorism. The President would be protecting the country from possible harm. The ensuing brouhaha of a legal challenge to the Order would make the issue a public spectacle. The overwhelming majority of Americans, republicans included, already believe that the SCOTUS ruling is terrible for the country. Republican legislators,whose primary interest in supporting the ruling is greed for campaign cash support from wealthy individuals and multi-national corporations, would be exposed as the utterly selfish, greedy creeps that they really are.

This could be the only possible avenue to an ensuing Constitutional Amendment. A Constitutional Amendment requires a two-thirds Senate Majority for passage. Republican Senators will never let this happen.

Unless they are forced into it.

Republican Senators have already made it very clear that they will never allow passage of a Constitutional Amendment of this nature because they are more than happy to compromise our national security in their greed for campaign support from wealthy private entities.

Legal or not, a Presidential Order of this nature could force the republican's hand on a Constitutional Amendment. Something needs to be done about this issue, and soon, because the longer this ruling stays in effect, the possibility of our national security being compromised increases exponentially.

Washington, Jan 21 -
Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) today released the following statement following the 5-4 Supreme Court ruling in the case Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission:

“Today’s decision will allow corporations to spend unlimited funds in support of political candidates. It will increase the stranglehold corporations now have over politics. There is no more effective way to concentrate even more money and power in the hands of the wealthy.

“Already, Wall Street is thriving on government largesse while America struggles with rising unemployment and foreclosures; insurance companies are preventing meaningful health care reform; and fossil fuel companies are preventing meaningful climate change legislation. The foundations of our democracy are at serious risk.

“The five-man majority has overreached considerably. The five-man majority brought up this issue of its own volition and has now legislated from the bench. The Supreme Court’s actions and decision violates 100 years of precedent as well as the Constitutional prerogative given to Congress to legislate,” said Kucinich. “In his dissent, Justice Stevens somberly remarks, ‘The Court’s ruling threatens to undermine the integrity of elected institutions across the Nation.’ Congress can hardly ignore such a stark and foreboding comment.

“Now, it is incumbent upon Congress to act. We must reclaim the democratic process and protect the voice of American citizens. If we allow corporations, many of whom are owned by foreign interests, to exert the kind of influence allowed by today’s ruling, we will have, finally and completely, abandoned Lincoln’s government ‘of the people, by the people, and for the people,’” said Kucinich.

http://kucinich.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=167374

[DFLforever]

22. None of those EO's over-rule a SC decision, do they?

...neither the president nor congress has that authority. Only we the people do, via constitutional amendment.

[lonestarnot]

17. LOL

:evilgrin:

[Democat]

20. How's Ralph Nader's plan working out?

Nader gave us Bush and Roberts and Alito.

[Uncle Joe]

21. Kicked, recommended and this is precisely why Obama and the Democrats need to go strong on populism.

It's the only thing that will give them a chance against so much corporate and mega-wealthy money.

Thanks for the thread, ProSense.