You know, Rep. Joe Wilson (R-SC) should be referenced every time some pathetic statist speaks. In answer to E. J. Dionne in a column he wrote in today's Washington Post called "A bipartisan push to clean up the Supreme Court's mess," all I can say to E. J. is "You, lie!!!"
It starts in paragraph 2:
At issue is the court's astonishingly naive decision in January that allows unlimited corporate spending to influence elections.
E. J., "You lie!!!" We know the Supreme Court in Citizens United did not authorize any corporation to direct their funds towards particular candidates, so that pretty much destroys Dionne's and every other statist's argument about what actually happened. But for Dionne, lying is easier.
Then Dionne gets stupid.
E. J. is "worried" for conservatives and Republicans (yeah, right):
But conservatives and Republicans should also be alarmed that this decision could encourage politicians to extort campaign spending from businesses. Is it really so hard to imagine a congressional leader quietly approaching a business executive and suggesting that unless her company invested heavily in certain key electoral contests, this regulation or that spending program might be changed at the expense of her enterprise?
Those who would agree with Dionne must think the American people are entirely brain-dead. Hello, this was going on under the McCain-Feingold 1st Amendment travesty, not something that came out of nowhere as a result of the Citizens United ruling. It's just that prior to the recent Supreme Court decision, corporations could launder their money through PACs or the various Democratic and Republican campaign committees. So Dionne telling people that this is somehow new is a complete mischaracterization of what had been going on, something Dionne knew was happening.
Dionne then discusses legislation by shyster Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY) and moonbat Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) and what it's supposed to do:
Its provisions would require full and timely disclosure of corporate political expenditures, and make it as difficult as possible for companies to hide efforts to influence elections by funneling their money through front groups. Corporations would have to disclose political expenditures to their shareholders and make them public, through links on their Web sites and in their annual reports.
E. J., "You lie!!!" Citizens United does that. In fact, Justice Thomas wrote an opinion that concurred in part and dissented in part. Thomas was very much against the disclosure of names as it could cause issues of safety for campaign contributors, something we've seen as Proposition 8 opponents in California have targeted its supporters. The "faux" legislation Shumer and Van Hollen are proposing falls in line with Citizens United.
I will add this; the garbage legislation by Schumer and Van Hollen, should it pass (it won't), should force the disclosure of Dionne's salary as a political expenditure because he is nothing more than a front for the Democratic Party and its politicians.
Near the end, Dionne's mendacity reaches its pinnacle [emphasis from original]:
And it is clear that rank-and-file Republicans know how radical and foolish this Supreme Court decision was. A Washington Post-ABC News poll last month found that 76 percent of Republicans opposed the ruling, along with 81 percent of independents and 85 percent of Democrats.
E. J., "You lie!!!" I fisked that poll last month and found the questions regarding Citizens United were completely misleading (read that post for why). Dionne using this poll to base his argument is nothing more than a naked attempt to further the lie, along with being ridiculous and stupid.
Along with Memeorandum, I have to give a special hat tip to Rep. Wilson.