Obama seeks to overturn Citizens United
This sounds a lot like sour grapes to me, and remember, the US Supreme Court already gave the go ahead for the usage of Super PACs, but since the Obamanut isn’t bringing is as much as Republican leaning PACs, he’s trying to put a stop to them, although his campaign is using them.
So now, the one and only Obamanut is wanting a Constitutional amendment, the document his is breaking by not enforcing laws, excepts those that benefit his agenda, to overturn a U.S. Supreme Court ruling letting super-PAC money flood the electoral process.
“The no-holds-barred flow of seven- and eight-figure checks, most undisclosed, into super-PACs; they fundamentally threaten to overwhelm the political process over the long run and drown out the voices of ordinary citizens,” Obama wrote in a chat session on the social news Web site Reddit.
“We need to start with passing the  Disclose Act that is already written and been sponsored in Congress — to at least force disclosure of who is giving to who,” Obama wrote. “We should also pass legislation prohibiting the bundling of campaign contributions from lobbyists.
“Over the longer term, I think we need to seriously consider mobilizing a constitutional amendment process to overturn Citizens United (assuming the Supreme Court doesn’t revisit it),” he wrote.
“Even if the amendment process falls short, it can shine a spotlight of [sic] the super-PAC phenomenon and help apply pressure for change,” he wrote. Upi
For those of you who don’t know, Reddit is a liberal leaning social site, much in the same category as Twitter and Facebook, which I have no use for. Any conservatives who wish to comment are attacked, one must never speak against Obama on those sites.
This was the first time Obama, a former constitutional law professor, voiced support for such an amendment since the Supreme Court’s Jan. 21, 2010, ruling in Citizens United vs. Federal Election Commission that said the First Amendment allowed for unlimited corporate and union spending on electioneering communication.
Obama intends, if he is re-elected, to have his administration “use whatever tools [are] out there, including a constitutional amendment, to turn this back.” (Sore loser).
Obama condemned the ruling in his 2010 State of the Union address six days after the court handed it down. “With all due deference to separation of powers, last week the Supreme Court reversed a century of law that I believe will open the floodgates for special interests — including foreign corporations — to spend without limit in our elections,” he said.
Justice Samuel Alito was seen frowning and mouthing “not true” when Obama spoke about the ruling. Obama allies run the Priorities USA Action independent expenditure political action committee in support of Obama’s re-election, but it refuses to accept anonymous donations. Upi
Which now brings up the question, Obama, if it were reversed, and the Super PACs supporting you raked in the big bucks, would you still be talking of a Constitutional Amendment? I seriously doubt it.