Senate Democrats have Voted to DESTROY the Constitution!!!

For the short-term goal of silencing the Koch Brothers, Senate Democrats voted yesterday to destroy America and everything She stands for.

Sure, on the surface it seems like a good idea:  Overturn the Supreme Court's Citizens United ruling so a few billionaires can't keep derailing everything the people want.   But that's just short-term, here-and-now reasoning, with no concern for the long-term implications.

In a word:  Freedom.

If these Nanny-State Welfare-Coddling Safety-Hammock Democrats are able to stop the Koch billionaires from purchasing elections today, who will they go after tomorrow?  Didn't think of that, didja?!?

Everyone who is rejoicing over yesterday's Senate vote to silence the Koch Brothers should think long and hard about that heartbreaking poem from Nazi Germany:

“When they stopped the Koch Brothers from purchasing the government, I did nothing...then, when they came for me...”

Federal Election Commission: the REAL Culprit Behind Huge Anonymous Campaign Contributions

Don’t get me wrong.  The Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision sucks balls.  Citizens United overturned decades of restrictions on political campaign funding; basically saying America is for sale to the highest bidder.

But Citizens United had nothing to do with disclosure rules requiring wealthy campaign donors to reveal their identities.  The culprit behind these anonymous campaign contributions is the Federal Election Commission (FEC).

The Federal Election Commission has taken already-existing campaign disclosure rules and basically “re-interpreted” them into oblivion.  Under the FEC’s new “interpretation,” campaign donors still have to identify themselves — but only if the donor has specifically stated how the money is supposed to be spent.

Let’s say you’ve donated a million dollars to a militant anti-abortion group.  If you’ve specifically told this group “I want you to spend this money on TV ads attacking pro-choice candidates,” then your identity has to be revealed.  But if you’ve given a million dollars to this same group without specifying how you want them to spend the money — what the fuck else are they going to spend it on? — then you’re allowed to keep hiding under your rock.  You can purchase an election and the lowly public won’t even know who purchased it.

Last April, Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D—Maryland) filed a lawsuit against the Federal Election Commission, trying to get them to “un-reinterpret” the already-existing disclosure rules.  A month ago the FEC voted on a motion to consider Van Hollen’s request.  The vote was 3 to 3; the tie vote killed the motion.  Needless to say, the three No votes came from the three Republican appointees to the FEC.

While the Supreme Court gets vilified for its Citizens United ruling — and rightly so — nobody even knows the names of the three FEC commissioners who are allowing wealthy campaign donors to keep cowering in the shadows while they purchase one election after another.

Those three names are:  Caroline Hunter, Donald McGahn II and Matthew Petersen.

Anonymous — get busy.

Get Money Out

Get Money Out is an online petition drive to get money out of politics.  Their goal is a constitutional amendment that will prohibit all people, and all business entities of any type, from contributing money — directly or indirectly — to any candidate for federal office.

It’ll be an uphill battle.  (How’s that for an understatement?)  But they’re hoping that with enough signatures, this can become a major issue for the 2012 elections.

About 80% of Americans are against the Supreme Court’s Citizens United ruling which opened the floodgates to unlimited “campaign contributions” (this used to be called bribery) to politicians.  This is one issue that cuts across all party lines and socioeconomic groups.

Hope you’ll check out their site and sign the petition.

Retroactive Recusal to Overturn a Supreme Court Decision

I have no idea whether this is a real possibility or just a far-flung theory that’ll never see the light of day.  Rep. Louise Slaughter (D—New York) has suggested that a retroactive recusal of Justice Clarence Thomas could lead to the overturning of the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision.

Supreme Court justices are entitled to their opinion that anonymous multi-million-dollar bribes are just hunky dory.  But this opinion can NOT be based on any conflict of interest.  That quaint old phrase again is “conflict of interest.”

Clarence Thomas’ wife may have benefited financially from the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision, and this fact was never disclosed.

Clarence Thomas has indicated on financial disclosure forms that his wife received no income since Thomas became a Supreme Court justice in 1991.  Well, except that she did.  She “earned” $700,000 from the Heritage Foundation between 2003 and 2007.  Sounds like a conflict of interest to me, if not perjury.

Louise Slaughter said:

“What I’m very interested here is the votes that he has cast that may be in conflict.  Of course, his wife can work. But the fact is there are only nine justice on that Supreme Court and it certainly should be a given that a family member of any of those people lucky enough to be a Supreme Court justice should not in any way involve themselves in matters that will go before that court. Now, we all know that she worked very hard for the Citizens United case, which I think is one of the most egregious things that have ever happened in the United States Supreme Court.  There is such a thing as a retroactive recusal. We’re looking into that. That case, if you remember, was decided 5-4. If we could take away his vote, we could wipe that out. It would lose…you know, the judiciary is the last place for all of us to go. We’re only as good — all of us — as the courts are, only as safe as the courts are good. Their interpretations are really what give us the freedoms when you come down to it. They have enormous power.”

All right.  Let’s hear it for retroactive recusal.

U.S. Senate In Session during Memorial Day Weekend

Whoa! Is this dedication, or what? So much for all those stereotypes about lazy sleazy politicians.

Unlike most Americans who spend Memorial Day lolling around on the beach or in the backyard, the hardworking members of the U.S. Senate will be working all through this three-day weekend.

Well, actually, they won’t be working. In fact most senators won’t even be in the Senate during this long weekend. But make no mistake, the Senate is In Session.

The Senate will be in pro forma session. No work will be conducted, but this technicality allows Wall Street’s prostitutes to prevent Elizabeth Warren from being appointed as head of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. President Obama was planning to use the recess appointment to appoint Warren. But now he can’t, since the Senate isn’t in recess. You know, since the Senate is in session. Well, they’re not really in session, but they’re [wink] “in session.” Or something.

I think the Senate Majority Leader should tell the Senate “Hey, we’re either in session or we’re not. Either we’re all here, conducting business all weekend, or the Senate is Not In Session. Pick one.”

But what do I know?

And now, get ready for Citizens United on steroids. Corporations are people — the Sequel.

A federal judge has expanded the scope of the Citizens United decision. (I didn’t know it had any room to expand even further.) The Citizens United ruling only applies to independent “third party” political organizations, not political candidates themselves.

U.S. District Judge James Cacheris, who made the Son of Citizens United ruling, said:

“For better or worse, Citizens United held that there is no distinction between an individual and a corporation with respect to political speech. Thus, if an individual can make direct contributions within the law's limits, a corporation cannot be banned from doing the same thing.”

All righty then — open the floodgates. And you thought they were already open.

Republican Sleazewipes Gearing Up to Attack Obama

Gearing up?!?!?!? What the fuck have they been doing already???

It’s sort of like when Ronald Reagan was first diagnosed with Alzheimer’s, and everybody was saying “how could they tell?”

David Bossie was the leading pit bull during the Republicans’ “investigative” attacks on Clinton all during his presidency. He’s now the president of Citizens United. Yes, that Citizens United.

And his next mission is to advise victorious Republicans on how to best utilize their new political capital to attack Obama as viciously as possible; how to get the Obama administration and congressional Democrats hogtied and paralyzed. As with Reagan’s Alzheimer’s, if Obama and the Democrats are hamstrung and tied in knots, how will we know?

Bossie was one of the authors of Slick Willie, an anti-Clinton book put together by Citizens United in 1992. Bossie and his fellow Citizens United shitwads spent jillions of taxpayer dollars investigating Whitewater, the “murder” of Vince Foster, you name it. Somehow, Republicans didn’t seem concerned then about the budget, or safeguarding taxpayers’ hard-earned dollars.

Republicans are bragging that when they take over the House next January, they’ll be holding one investigation after another, trying to dig up something — anything — on Obama. Your tax dollars at work.

Republicans have spent the last two years placing holds on everything imaginable, including the funding to enforce laws that have already been passed. Maybe the occasional Democrat could grow a pair, and place a hold on the funding to investigate Obama. Just a thought, in case the Democrats ever decide to fight fire with fire instead of bringing a pocket knife to a gun fight.