Hyperbole and Hypocrisy on Campaign Finance Ruling

A must read article about the Citizen’s United case and the supposed destruction of democracy.

Many states, including Illinois and Maryland, allow corporate contributions to state candidates. As an Illinois state senator, Obama accepted direct contributions from the corporate treasuries of Citigroup and London-based pharmaceutical giant AstraZeneca, among others …

Furthermore, 28 states allow Citizens United-style independent expenditures by corporations; Virginia is one example. During the commonwealth’s November gubernatorial campaign, there were no allegations of impropriety, and I have heard no complaints about any of the candidates being “bought” by nefarious corporations. …

The fundamental First Amendment issues that underlie this case have been lost in the political sniping since the president’s State of the Union address. That’s a tragedy. Government regulation of political speech is a crucial issue that should be dealt with head on rather than through hyperbolic statements of impending doom.

If the president, a reasonable man and a constitutional scholar, were confronted with the question of whether he agreed with the government’s position that the Constitution does not forbid the banning of books, I think that we might find some common ground. Instead of peppering the White House with questions about Justice Samuel Alito’s silent “outburst,” maybe the Fourth Estate should ask that substantive question. We might actually get somewhere.