Obama: SCOTUS ruling a "major victory for big oil, Wall Street banks, health insurance companies."

[jefferson_dem]

President Obama issued the following statement today regarding the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission.

Here's the full text:

With its ruling today, the Supreme Court has given a green light to a new stampede of special interest money in our politics. It is a major victory for big oil, Wall Street banks, health insurance companies and the other powerful interests that marshal their power every day in Washington to drown out the voices of everyday Americans. This ruling gives the special interests and their lobbyists even more power in Washington--while undermining the influence of average Americans who make small contributions to support their preferred candidates. That's why I am instructing my Administration to get to work immediately with Congress on this issue. We are going to talk with bipartisan Congressional leaders to develop a forceful response to this decision. The public interest requires nothing less.

http://tpmlivewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/01/obama-supreme-court-ruling-a-major-victory-for-big-oil-wall-street-banks-health-insurance-companies.php

[Captain Hilts]

1. Well said 'Bam! We want more of this. nt

[villager]

2. There's that fucking "bipartisan," again-- which means nothing will get done.

n/t

[Armstead]

5. Well.....Maybe McCain. It's about the only issue he was right about

[jefferson_dem]

6. Actually, this sucky ruling may provide an ace opportunity for the President to claim...

the populist torch.

[jgraz]

8. Or, it will provide an ace opportunity for the President to claim...

that he's powerless to do anything.

[jefferson_dem]

19. Nah.

Sorry. You must be having an extra rough day today...with JE's embarrassing mea culpa and all. If only...

[jgraz]

22. You seem awfully obsessed with John Edwards.

Rielle, is that you?

[jefferson_dem]

54. Not really.

I've always known "the son of the meal worker" was full of shit. You?

[jgraz]

59. Well, unlike you

I don't crawl up the ass of candidates I vote for. So I really don't care.

[jefferson_dem]

62. Not so sure.

It's obvious you've been a bitter sore loser since the primaries. That's a shame too...because any legitimate critiques you may now have ring hollow.

[jgraz]

66. Projection, thy name is jefferson_dem.

You simply can't understand someone who doesn't worship their candidate like a demigod so you somehow think you're tweaking me with these John Edwards comments. It's really sad, because it's all you have left. Every single issue the left has raised about Obama has been proven to be valid, and you know it. All you can do is play these childish little games, hoping no one will notice how intellectually bankrupt you are.

[jefferson_dem]

67. So proclaimeth jgraz, who initiated this exchange with a substance-less, one line snark

about how little faith he has in the President. That's what's really sad. All you're left with is all you ever had - whiny defeatism. Enjoy the doldrums.

[jgraz]

70. Uh huh.

Obama concedes: Don’t ‘jam through’ healthcare reform

http://rawstory.com/2010/01/obama-concedes-jam-through-healthcare-reform

New Dem Talking Point: We can't pass anything without Republican help

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/01/dem-talking-points-were-screwed.php


Doesn't look substance-less to me, unless you've got your head buried in the sand.

[fugop]

11. Yep

I've been a pretty strong backer of Obama, even when I don't agree with everything he's done, but you're right. He's got to take this chance to pivot away from the losing battle of bipartisanship and get back to the "Let's get it done for the people, whatever it takes" approach. And he has to not just say it, but DO IT.

This may be his one chance to make a strong pivot and harness the anger out there. I was a big proponent of reaching out, but it stopped working around day 2 of his presidency. Time to acknowledge Republicans just flat out suck, so it's time for the president and the Democrats to just take their chances with losing seats and DO SOMETHING! I'm so tired of defending the inaction. 41 seats in the Senate should not be a majority. Time to prove it.

[robo50]

77. How many torches do we offer him before he accepts and runs with

one of them?

He's definitely playing this close to the chest...

No Bi-partisanship here........fuck the SCOTUS.......re-appoint 9 more, or pack the court to eleven.

The SCOTUS just screwed America, and China is fine with this.

[krawhitham]

30. At this point NOTHING can get done without it

Sucks

[pasto76]

82. dude, even the republicans know their time is limited

The coporations will not be interested in supporting sitting politicians. They will want fully groomed 100% obedient puppets.

[Jennicut]

3. Now keep talking the populist talk and do something about it.

People will get behind you again if you, Mr. President.

[tridim]

15. The people are already behind him based on the polls

What we need are MORE people to understand that he's pretty much the only person in D.C. that is trying to fight for the people over corporations.

[treestar]

21. If he had more cheerleaders he'd have more capital

If people got behind him rather than criticizing him and calling him a wimp at every turn. Let the progressives show they have some real persistence and march on Washington in support.

But no they'd rather sit at keyboards and criticize.

[glitch]

23. You don't cheer the player who's running the ball the wrong way down the field.

You yell at him to turn around, THEN you cheer.

But no they'd rather sit at keyboards and cheer any move, even wrong ones. :crazy:

[tridim]

26. Do you think his new banking regulation ideas are a "wrong move"?

If so, WTF?

[SunsetDreams]

29. This is a wrong move?

:crazy:

[glitch]

34. No this is actually the right talk. But treestar is talking about a year's worth of cheering

even when there were a lot of wrong moves.

edit: Hopefully this talk will be followed by real action.

[tridim]

44. There's the fallacy..

Nobody here cheerleads EVERYTHING, but some of us do recognize that the administration has done lots of good and tend to give them credit when it's deserved.

There are certainly people here who dismiss everything good because he's not perfect. That is a problem.

[SunsetDreams]

53. I couldn't have said it better myself.

[JoeyT]

78. Not really.

"Nobody here cheerleads EVERYTHING"
Really? I can think of a bunch of people that, no matter how bad the policy, could be relied on to demand people stop questioning anything President Obama did. We're not talking stuff of an arguable nature. Not even the wars, HCR/HIR, or budget stuff. I'm talking about fighting for increased surveillance and detention powers for the next Republican administration to abuse. Things that were not only unconstitutional, but outright immoral. There was a massive torrent of "I trust Obama! Why don't you?" posts in every thread questioning the legality/morality of that decision. Once it became obvious that HCR was going to become HIR we were also treated to talking point defenses of the same industry we'd spent the last year and a half attacking. Suddenly insurance companies weren't the bad guys anymore.

"There are certainly people here who dismiss everything good because he's not perfect. That is a problem."
Actually most of us that have criticized him have no problem agreeing with him when he's done something good. He *has* done a lot of good stuff. It doesn't hurt me in any way to say that. It isn't like anyone wants the man impeached. The problem is that there are people that would cheer anything as long as it was one of their own doing it. Had the president come down on the opposite side of this decision, I have little doubt at all there would be plenty of people demanding we agree with him. Now that I mention it: His coming down where he did on this decision is a good thing that I applaud wholeheartedly. If he runs with this and starts hammering on it you'll see the critics swing behind him again immediately.

[Cha]

41. It must help their

wimpiness to call someone that.. who's obviously not.

[lumberjack_jeff]

74. Chickens? Eggs?

He doesn't need political capital to do the right thing. Doing the right thing earns it.

[Go2Peace]

75. You get it. The capital is already there, he just has to access it by "doing the right thing".

[GOTV]

32. The people were behind the PO too. That's how relevant the people are (nt)

[tridim]

43. As was Congress and the President until Joe Lieberman killed it.

[GOTV]

48. Joe Lieberman will kill this too and again without so much as a dirty look from Obama and the Dems

[tridim]

49. Joe Lieberman has exactly zero power now.

He lost when Coakley lost.

[GOTV]

50. I wasn't really discussing JL but are you trying to say the Dems are more powerful now with Brown?

We couldn't get what we wanted with HCR and we will get less now.

BTW, if JL is powerless, will we take away his chairmanships?

[jwirr]

83. We will now be forced to use reconciliation and the 51 vote solution.

[ima_sinnic]

63. you fell for that "excuse"? sheesh--a fool born every minute.

[Better Believe It]

73. And not just populist rhetoric. Walk the walk.

[Catshrink]

4. I'm sure the corporations are quaking in their boots.

To do anything would require a spine, something we haven't seen lately.

[and-justice-for-all]

7. Their decision is a disgrace to Democarcy...nt

[secondwind]

9. Dems will never get elected again......everyone knows Big Business has always stood behind the 'Pubs

[glitch]

24. Corporate Dems will. nt

[glitch]

25. Corporate Dems will. nt

[SunsetDreams]

10. Sock it to them Obama!

[mzmolly]

12. Sigh

of relief. I hope we can legislate effectively against his bullshit ruling.

[RaleighNCDUer]

13. Which, of course, means that REAL healthcare reform is a lost opportunity.

For at LEAST a couple generations.

The industry won't shy at spending tens, hundreds of millions in campaigns to protect their profits. They have the PR skills, they have the money, and now they have the permission, indeed the mandate, to use them.

Oh, and buy buy to our SS and medicare, as well - they WILL be privatized by these self-same corporations.

[global1]

14. We're Still Seeing The Effect Of BushCo With This Decision.........

and it looks like the people want to go back to that. Nothing like shooting yourself in your foot and voting against your best interests.

[tridim]

16. Just watch, the polls will be 80+% against the decision.

This is one issue that will have vast public support.

Ironically the teabaggers will be the only major political group that supports the decision. I'm just waiting for their official statement. Should be a fun read.

[quantass]

27. Unlikely any such poll will get widesspread MSM play

Extremely unlikely.

[JoeyT]

79. Even with them it's possible to turn them against it

on a one on one basis. Just keep reminding them over and over that this means other countries can buy a company and use it to influence elections to get people friendly to their interests elected.

I'm not suggesting partnering or marching with them, which would be a disaster. ("Which part of the march are Democrats?" "Look for the signs that are spelled properly.") I'm suggesting using their stupidity and xenophobia against them. If nothing else we might be able to make them fight one another until this is over with.

[liquid diamond]

76. I wish the assholes that keep comparing Obama to Bush

would realize this.

[AndyA]

17. Get it in gear quickly, President Obama.

This must be addressed immediately!

Perhaps opening up an investigation into the crimes of the Bush Administration would be a good place to start?

Wonder if Nancy Pelosi is still glad she took impeachment off the table?

This isn't America anymore. :(

[bain_sidhe]

18. Well! I guess he told them, alright!

[tridim]

28. Yes he did tell them.

WTF are you talking about?

[flamingdem]

20. I'm glad he's speaking out forcefully, let's support him FULLY NOW nt

[GOTV]

31. He used the 'b' word. Nothing substantive will get done ...

... the GOP loves getting corporate money into the process.

I predict a bill that actually gives tax breaks to corporations that donate at least $10 million to political candidates which we'll all be expected to cheer because we need to be realistic and understand that it's the best we could do.

[bvar22]

33. THIS has been brought to YOU by the conservative DLC/Blue Dog Democrats...

...who HELPED Republicans seat Alito and Roberts on the Supreme Court.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gang_of_14

These Conservative/DLC "Democrats" (in name only) are a CANCER in the belly of the Democratic Party.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

35. Also says the Man who took --

a massive amount of $$$ from the healthcare industry and then negotiated a deal with Pharma and sat back while the People were sold into the hands of the health insurance industry.

Lots of lovely words, but what will they be followed up with?

On edit: O didn't seem to have a problem with corporate cash during the election. ;)

Obama Received $20 Million from Healthcare Industry in 2008 Campaign
Almost three times the amount given to McCain
by Brad Jacobson

While some sunlight has been shed on the hefty sums shoveled into congressional campaign coffers in an effort to influence the Democrats' massive healthcare bill, little attention has been focused on the far larger sums received by President Barack Obama while he was a candidate in 2008.

A new figure, based on an exclusive analysis created for Raw Story by the Center for Responsive Politics, shows that President Obama received a staggering $20,175,303 from the healthcare industry during the 2008 election cycle, nearly three times the amount of his presidential rival John McCain. McCain took in $7,758,289, the Center found.

http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2010/01/12-9




Blue Dog Coalition’ rakes in corporate cash.

The 52-member Blog Dog Coalition has been constantly attempting to weaken President Obama’s efforts to pass progressive health care, clean energy, and economic recovery legislation through Congress. According to a new report by the Center for Public Integrity, many of the industries that are opposing Obama’s agenda are now contributing heavily to the Blue Dogs:

So far this year, the political action committee attached to the fiscally conservative House Democratic voting bloc is on track to shatter all its fundraising records, raising more in the first six months of 2009 — more than $1.1 million — than it did in the entire 2003-04 fundraising cycle. Nearly 54 percent of the Blue Dog PAC’s haul this year comes from the energy, financial services and health care industries, up from 45 percent in 2004, according to analysis of CQ MoneyLine data by the Center for Public Integrity.

http://thinkprogress.org/2009/07/23/blue-dog-cash/

[Jennicut]

37. How else do you get elected to begin with?

It was bad before, but it will be even worse now. 2012 will be the year of the corps controlling the election.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

38. It's going to be insane for severval election cycles ---

until (if ever) something truly radical happens that forces legislation to challenge the SCOTUS.

It is gonna get damned ugly. :(

[TheKentuckian]

36. I've got his back to the tune of infinity percent on this.

Anyone that continues to disregard or minimize the grave threats personal, economically, ecologically, to justice, to peace, to freedom, and to liberty this twisted corporate influence and control is a willfully ignorant fool that would sell their soul and those of all their children's and their children's children for a few pennies or a bowl of soup at need.

The first rule of fighting corporatism is their are no rules for fighting corporatism. What is a fair trade for personal and economic freedom?

Who can prosper or find happiness in an economic theocracy of parasitic greed that exists purely to grow and profit for profit's sake?

[Generator]

39. Obama's grin must be ear to ear!

[Cha]

42. That's a fucking stupid remark.

[SunsetDreams]

45. Don't worry Cha, it was just generated.

[ProgressOnTheMove]

40. At least we knew with Sotomayor and her decision Pres. Obama was always with the people..

he just tried to work for a path of least resistance. I don't think even Pres. Obama knew how hard the GOP would stand in the way.

[SunsetDreams]

46. kick

[BrklynLiberal]

47. Thank you sir, may I have another?

[SunsetDreams]

52. cute pic

[Blue Owl]

51. Talk the talk...

But more importantly, please WALK the WALK when it comes to this issue...

[DailyGrind51]

55. And I'm sure Congress will back you on this like they did the public option?

Don't hold your breath, Mr. President, they are probably ordering new office furniture expecting a windfall in corporate contributions!

[bluethruandthru]

56. Great words...

Now I'd like to see the action. I hate that I'm at the point where I don't believe anything Obama says.

[depakid]

57. "bipartisan Congressional leaders"

:eyes:

[fugop]

58. Gotta wonder (and hope)

Who knows? Until the SOTU, I'm going to hope that this is the opening Obama needs to step up there and verbally beat the crap out of freakin' EVERYBODY! I'd love to see him get up there and do a "Shame on the Supreme Court for this ruling. Shame on Congress and the Senate for taking an entire year to do nothing but drag their heels and infight (on the Dem side) and obstruct and battle everything (on the R side). Shame on them for doing everything they can to protect everyone and everything BUT the American people. It's time to step up and take our country back from these idiots!"

OK, he can't say all that, exactly, but it's certainly an opening for him to come out guns blazing and ripping a new one for pretty much the entire bunch of morons screwing us from their Beltway Bubble.

I'd love to see that. Don't think I will, but I've got what - four days to dream?

[NYC_SKP]

60. K & R nt

[Smashcut]

61. "bipartisan Congressional leaders" - I'm sure Repubs and DLC Dems will be all over this

:eyes:

[ima_sinnic]

64. why, just ONCE, doesn't he skip the "bipartisan" CRAP?

the magic formula for getting NOTHING done.

Just ONCE, be courageous and bold, and work with the fucking DEMOCRATS and show everybody how it's done? JUST ONE FUCKING TIME?

weak, ineffectual, timid, compromised, and useless.

[jsamuel]

65. I like the way he went after them there.

More of that please...

[democracy1st]

68. all talk !

[Crunchy Frog]

69. "Bipartisan Congressional leaders"?

I want some of what he's smoking.

[inna]

81. me too.

[valerief]

71. Add more justices!!!! Reverse this and make corporations non-persons.

Of course, this will never happen in my lifetime and probably never at all.

[Faux pas]

72. F-A-Doodle-Doo. Guess my new voting strategy is

to vote for the person with the least amount of campaign funds. That's what I loved about Jerry Brown (ex and future calif gov) riding a bus and eating tuna sandwiches out of a brown paper page. I still think he would have made a great Prez.

[JoeyT]

80. Well good.

By the way, for those upthread, the bipartisan part may not be as bad as you think. It's possible that McCain will get on board almost immediately, since his track record isn't too bad in this area and he's already talking about how bad the decision was. He could be the key to getting enough R votes to make a constitutional amendment, which will prevent this from happening again in the future.

It would be ironic if we wound up getting the campaign finance reform out of this that we've been bitching for for so long.
Scalia's head would explode.

[harun]

84. Bi-partisan = ain't gonna do sh*t.

[NoFace]

85. Democrats already represent such a wide range of opinion under the same tent--...

***Democrats already represent such a wide range of opinion under the same tent--that's enough diversity. Can't we just call the Dems "virtually bi-partisan" and start using signing statements and other nefarious means to save he entire friggin' country?***

Hahahaha....:)


That was from the link provided. Second response down. Too funny though I had to repeat it.