Also posted at ClashDaily
As everyone knows, liberals detest racism, except government-sanctioned, and often government-imposed, racism, which is sometimes known as “affirmative action.” They despise violence and war, except the Obama administration’s aggressive use of drones to take out anyone deemed an enemy of the State, who may or may not be on American soil and may or may not be an American citizen. They will not tolerate environmental destruction, except the tons of toxic, climate-change causing smog pumped in the air by private jets transporting Barack and Michelle Obama and Al Gore to luxury resorts all over the planet. Yes, they so hate all of that stuff, but based on the wails of outrage it launched and their incessant bleating of its name, there’s nothing they hate more than “Citizens United,” a 2010 Supreme Court case whose full name is Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. This decision, which struck down the McCain-Feingold law’s restrictions on corporation’s making independent expenditures for political speech in federal elections, has inspired more left-wing angst and gnashing of teeth than a week’s full of nightmares starring Dick Cheney. Consider the following from Time Magazine. Yes, I know that it’s an irrelevant rag, but it does provide a peek inside the fevered brain of the average liberal. Here’s what Adam Cohen wrote there about Citizens United:
It is not an overstatement to say that the 5 to 4 decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, which was handed down in January, could permanently change American democracy. …
The new rule that the court laid down completely reshapes the political landscape. Until January this year, if companies such as ExxonMobil or Walmart wanted to throw their weight around in federal elections, they could encourage their employees to contribute their own money to a political-action committee, an indirect route that had inherent limits — notably the fact that there is only so much money employees are willing to give to fight their company’s political battles.
Now, ExxonMobil or Walmart can simply go into the district of a member of Congress who is giving them a hard time and spend as much money as it wants to defeat him.
Even their victories in the 2012 election, in which they retained both the White House, but also control of the U.S. Senate, hasn’t quelled their bemoaning this evil, destructive act by the Roberts’ Court. You thought that the Dred Scott decision, the one that denied the humanity of black people and fueled the march to civil war, was bad? Citizens United is just as bad, according the liberal democrat Rep. Ed Markey, who is currently running for John Kerry’s U.S. Senate seat in Massachusetts. Why is this decision a scourge on our body politic? Let me quote Rep. Markey:
“The damage the court unleashed by allowing outside money to control elections constitutes a legitimate constitutional crisis.”
Outside money to control elections? That’s outrageous, egregious, and atrocious! It’s ghastly and intolerable, except when it isn’t. From Politico, a report on last Tuesday’s special primary election in the Illinois 2nd Congressional district, a race to fill the seat of disgraced former congressman Jesse Jackson, Jr.
A National Rifle Association-friendly ex-congresswoman, Debbie Halvorson — the only white candidate in a field of more than a dozen candidates seeking the Chicagoland seat — jumped ahead of the pack on the strength of her name ID and lengthy service in state politics. But that was before New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg and his super PAC carpet-bombed Halvorson with a $2 million-plus ad campaign highlighting her pro-gun views and propping up rival Robin Kelly.
Ms. Kelly won the election, or perhaps I should say Mayor Bloomberg bought the election, and of course, liberals are outraged! Oh wait …they’re actually delighted that now candidates know they don’t need to “kowtow” to the NRA, as Doug Schoen, Bloomberg’s pollster stated. Joe “Buy a Shotgun” Biden noted the “clear signal” sent by the voters of Illinois’ 2nd congressional district. “The message is “there will be a moral price and a political price for inaction,” said the Vice President. Are you sure that the message isn’t that outside money creating a constitutional crisis thing, Joe?
Check out the reports from National Journal’s Ron Fournier, or MS-NBC’s Rachel Maddow. Do you detect any anger over the $2 million plus Bloomberg spent to influence an election 1000 miles from his jurisdiction?
This episode rips down the pretty drape of self-righteousness and obsession with clean government to expose the hideous hypocrisy of this bunch. Couple it with the announcement earlier this week that Barack Obama’s never-ending campaign will begin to sell access to the White House for donors who pony up at least $500,000, an act that even his media lapdogs felt compelled to call out, we are reminded once again of an indisputable truth. Liberals lie.