I love it when even our Vice President doesn’t understand how our government works

January 28th, 2010

In response to the Supreme Court decision allowing corporations and other organizations to spend money on political commercials, discount cialis cialis Vice President Joe Biden said:

“I think it was dead wrong and we have to correct it, seek ” said Biden, inviting Congress to pass legislation negating the decision.

Of course, it’s not possible for Congress to “pass legislation” that would negate the Courts decision because the only way to “negate” it would be to amend the Constitution and change the First Amendment. A simple bill or law “negating” the decision would fail because it, too, would be overruled by the Constitution…a simple fact I would have hoped the Vice President of the United States would understand.

Entry Filed under: Politics

6 Comments Add your own

  • 1. Fred  |  January 28th, 2010 at 4:01 pm

    Biden? Understand?!?

    Oh that’s a good one!

  • 2. Debunked  |  January 28th, 2010 at 9:37 pm

    It may be impossible to negate the decision.

    But it is quite possible and perfectly legal to pass legislation that makes corporations think before pouring vast quantities of money into political campaigns. I would think that most people would realize that is what he was referring to, especially with Grayson’s proposed bills already out there.

  • 3. Fred  |  January 28th, 2010 at 9:42 pm

    Yeah, what the left is screaming about is this may level the playing field. Now special interests, especially unions poor untold millions into the process.

    Of course the left is fine with that. They also have no issue with 527 PACs that get to hide their contributors under McCain Feingold.

    After all there is nothing the left hates more than equity in politics.

    Left speech good, right speech bad.

  • 4. Debunked  |  January 29th, 2010 at 12:34 am

    Yes, blanket statements are always productive. Seriously, enjoying that tin-foil hat?

    I believe 527 PACs are supposed to be restricted to issue advocacy, not candidate advocacy, so that’s one distinct difference. But obviously things aren’t always so black and white. But either way, you’re putting words in my writing.

    Please, point out where I advocated for 527 PACs. I didn’t. I’m arguing against pouring more money into political campaigns. Politics is already controlled by the wealthy – on both sides of the spectrum. I would be for any policies which reduce the amount of funding to candidates and bring back actual debates as opposed to rhetoric filled advertisements on prime time. I would not oppose the elimination or, at least, proper enforcement of those 527 PACs and serious revamping in how we enforce political contribution limits.

    But, then, that would be a true leftist’s view. Not the moderate view that too many right wingers associate with the American left.

  • 5. Elliot  |  January 29th, 2010 at 11:05 am

    I don’t mind legislation that tries to address some of the concerns. For example, I’m all in favor of deep and clear disclosure…right in the ads (This ad paid for by GE.)

    But Debunked, I’m not the one who used the word “negate.” The VP did. And it’s not possible to negate it without changing the Constitution or changing the Court. Compensate for it? Yes. Negate it? No. And the VP (who was a Senator) should know that.

  • 6. Billiam  |  January 30th, 2010 at 3:14 pm

    Kind of like Obama being a Constitutional wunderkind should have know his line was false? They are either ignorant, bad enough, or liars, which would be worse.

Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed


About

Being in a wheelchair gives you a unique perspective on the world. This blog features many of my views on politics, art, science, and entertainment. My name is Elliot Stearns. More...

The Abortionist

Recent Comments

Categories

Meta