PHOTO: Supreme Court Justice Alito explains anger at Obama...

[yurbud]

Supreme Court Justice Sammy "Scalito" (Skinny Scalia) Alito explains why he frowned when Obama criticized the court's decison in Citizen's United vs. the FEC:




NOTE: this version should be better tolerated by the thin-skinned.

[Mz Pip]

1. What I would like to hear from Alito

is why he thinks Obama's assessment of their ruling is "Not true." Write and editorial and explain it all to us.

It's easy enough to mutter "Not true." A bit harder perhaps to explain why.

[existentialist]

2. I read one editorial that argued

that Alito was "rude but right."

I don't remember where I read it.

The editorial argued that the law struck down was only seven years old rather than more than a century.

Technically that is correct. But that was the narrow holding. The language of the holding was far more sweeping. In substance Obama was correct, but if you want to pick nits you could argue, technically, that he was wrong.

[John1956PA]

6. As I posted elsewhere, maybe President Obama was not clear about the foreign money threat.

I do not care for Alito, and I hate the Citizens United decision. However, I believe that President Obama should have been more careful with his SOTU comment about the threat of foreign money flowing into US election campaigns. As we all realize, a foreign corporation can create a US subsidiary and use that subsidiary to buy campaign ads. But that charade is something that a foreign corporation could have done before the Citizens United decision. As I understand it, the Citizens United held that corporations have the same freedom of speech rights as individual do, therefore, corporations (including subsidiaries of foreign corporations) are allowed to buy campaign ads within 30 days of a primary election and within 60 days of a general election. President Obama correctly summarized that. However, President Obama went on to suggest that the Citizens United decision allows for the flow of foreign money into US election campaigns. In theory, such flow of foreign money is already prevented by other laws which the Citizens United court acknowledged as valid.

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

7. I have heard no one else say that the flow of foreign money into US

elections is prevented by "other laws". What other laws? Remember, we are speaking of corporations, not individuals. Every single article I have read on the subject says that multinationals or even foreign government owned corporations can dish out as much money as they wish. This issue was even specifically addressed in the oral arguements and ignored by the majority from what I understand.

[rgbecker]

11. What would prevent foreigners from becoming shareholders in US...

Corporations and approving funding of campaigns against, say, a democratic candidate who wants to repeal NAFTA?

[John1956PA]

13. You are correct. Foreign money can creep into US corps., but the recent ruling was neutral on that.

I wish there was a way to keep foreign money out of US election campaigns. Foreign money can creep into campaigns via the two above-stated methods: (i) foreign corporations setting up US subsidiaries, and (ii) foreigners infusing money into US corporations. These are charades/loopholes around the "other laws" which I referred to in my post and which are designed to keep foreign money out "in theory." In reality, foreign money creeps in via the aforementioned two charades/loopholes. The point of my above post is that the Citizens United case has not opened the door for the creation of such charades/loopholes, since they existed well before that case was decided. I feel that President Obama's words incorrectly suggested that the Citizens United decision created new opportunities for such charades/loopholes to come into being.

[BrklynLiberal]

3. SCALITO... Excellent

[peacetalksforall]

4. Alitoini. It fits him perfectly. There is truth in the message. Absolute truth.

[EFerrari]

5. Scalito was a political appointee of the most corrupt administration in our history.

He should be wearing a bag over his head at all times.

[jberryhill]

8. Oh, I Get It - He's Italian

You could make a funny mafia reference, too.

[yurbud]

9. it's the content of the ruling. Actually read the text in the photo.

Since he was the one who caught everyone's attention at the State of the Union, he was the appropriate target. If you like, I will also do a photo with all five conservative justices who voted for it, including two WASPS and an African American.

I doubt that most Italians are that thin-skinned, and most are probably more concerned about having a real democracy than a thug on the Supreme Court being portrayed as the fascist he is.

[jberryhill]

10. The people who make Hitler pictures of the president feel the same way

It is possible to make politically commentary without resort to comparisons which demonize more than they illuminate.

So, Clarence Thomas as Umcle Tom, then?

[yurbud]

12. sometimes the shoe fits.