Originally Posted by JollyRoger (Post 2393841)

Ah, I see, not wanting foreigners to participate in US elections is "xenophobia" now? Man, they sure are rolling you guys good this time. Head like a hole.

Originally Posted by Billybob (Post 2393219)

... Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr., a member of the majority in that decision, broke with the justices’ usual decorum to openly dissent. He shook his head no and mouthed the words “not true.”

Originally Posted by tonkovich (Post 2393865)

cult membership tends to encourage fascist beliefs in the cult's propaganda. :D

or, who can forget the crusades? or the spanish inquisition? father coughlin?

Originally Posted by lonepunman (Post 2394174)

You're still scared of the Fascists? Nazi or Italian? The Crusades? And the Spanish Inquistition? And what did Father Coughlin do to your family? Or you, for that matter?

Why are they even in this discussion?

EH? :rolleyes:

Oh. I know. Namecalling.

Got it. ;)

Originally Posted by Billybob (Post 2392669)

Should the country expect more from the Constitutional Law Professor in Chief?

We've already heard the "political financing sky is falling hysteria" from the unwashed masses of liberal constitutional scholars on this forum, but is it fair to expect more from the first Black Editor of the Harvard Law Review?

President Wrong on Citizens United Case

[Bradley A. Smith]

Tonight the president engaged in demogoguery of the worst kind, when he claimed that last week's Supreme Court decision in Citizens United v. FEC, "open[ed] the floodgates for special interests — including foreign corporations — to spend without limit in our elections . Well I don't think American elections should be bankrolled by America's most powerful interests, or worse, by foreign entities."

The president's statement is false.

The Court held that 2 U.S.C. Section 441a, which prohibits all corporate political spending, is unconstitutional. Foreign nationals, specifically defined to include foreign corporations, are prohibiting from making "a contribution or donation of money or ather thing of value, or to make an express or implied promise to make a contribution or donation, in connection with a Federal, State or local election" under 2 U.S.C. Section 441e, which was not at issue in the case. Foreign corporations are also prohibited, under 2 U.S.C. 441e, from making any contribution or donation to any committee of any political party, and they prohibited from making any "expenditure, independent expenditure, or disbursement for an electioneering communication... ."

This is either blithering ignorance of the law, or demogoguery of the worst kind.
— Bradley A. Smith is Josiah H. Blackmore II/Shirley M. Nault Designated Professor of Law at Capital University Law School

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZTVkODZiM2M0ODEzOGQ3MTMwYzgzYjNmODBiMzQzZjk=