Something our president said during his first State of the Union speech really surprised me. I was taken aback when he devoted a part of his very long speech to publicly scold the justices of the United State Supreme Court.
He was polite about it – almost respectful - but the message was clear that they got it wrong and a public declaration of that opinion might be in order. It was almost as if he was working the refs, much like Roy Williams does along the basketball court. Maybe President Obama will get a "makeup call" on the next close decision.
The issue they disagree on is corporate campaign spending, and oddly enough, this is one issue that both of the 2008 candidates for president agree on.
A part of what the Supreme Court overturned was the McCain-Feingold act. The high court has had a 100 year trend of limiting corporate political activity, but this Supreme Court ruled that involvement is somewhat protected by our free speech rights.
I can't help but think about what seems to be an irony here. I remember as candidate Obama, he chose not to accept public financing and spending limits - and instead broke all the records on money raised by a politician.
In other words, when he was running for office he didn't want to put any limit on how much people could give him – or what he could spend. Has he changed his mind, or am I missing something here?
That's my turn. Now it's your turn. To comment on this segment, or anything else, email me at firstname.lastname@example.org.
Emailed comments from viewers:
You should study your subject before you make such a public comment. In my opinion, Obama was totally correct in his statement to Supreme Court. Before this ruling there was a limit as to how much a person or corp. could give-now there will be no limit, Which, as Obama stated, will open the flood gates to unlimited involvement and influence of huge companies. I'm so surprised at your comment-apparently you spoke before you engaged in giving it any thought. Hope this will be a reminder of how foolish these commentaries can sometimes be. When you are before such a large audience it's good to always be fair.
This gives CORPORATIONS which are not individuals the right to contribute to campaigns. I realize that the new law exempts foreign corporations from contributing, but who can say that foreign officials will not secretly finance those corporations and affect the outcome of elections. People should be outraged at the decision of the court. We want DEMOCRACY FOR THIS COUNTRY NOT JUST A CAPITALISTIC SOCIETY. I would urge you and everyone to seriously consider the implications of this decision by the highest court of the land
Did Obama violate the Finegold rules in raising his funds for the presidential run?
Also, I found it quite interesting that the president in addressing public cynicism, asked the members of the house and senate to represent the people of the united states and not their own personal (lobbyist pay off) agendas. Nice touch that they be called upon to be as decent as the voters who elected them! Noticed that the "talking heads" had nothing to say about this issue.
Thank You for your response to the President's state of the union speech last night as it related to scolding our Supreme Court Justices. I know most of America is beginning to see the need to change the current administration's direction and it seems evident to me that our President is intent on carrying out his far left agenda. I pray his efforts will be voided by the will of Americans at the ballet box.
I was most disappointed to see how politicized your remarks were regarding the State of The Union Address. From your opening sarcastic words regarding it's length to your one sided comments about the President's remarks about the Supreme Court and big corporation donations reflected a prejudice against this administration.
Your whole demeanor said I'm a Republican. That's fine but we don't need another FOX media mentality in the South. Me I'm independent and could care less which party you support. BUT your role as a manager of a local media station is or should be above that.
It is not what you said, but how you said it and the facts you left out--i.e. the millions of people like me who donated to the President in multiple small amounts.
I agree with most of what you said, however you got one important point dead wrong. It is Mike Krzyzewski who works the Refs, my friend, not Roy Williams. Krzyzewski wrote the book! Just thought I should correct you.
Copyright 2010 WECT. All rights reserved.