One of President Obama’s more bizarre detours, during his headlong flight from answering questions from serious journalists about his record in office, took him onto social media site Reddit for an online town hall on Wednesday. There, the President declared (well, typed) that “we need to seriously consider mobilizing a constitutional amendment process to overturn Citizens United, assuming the Supreme Court doesn’t revisit it. Even if the amendment process falls short, it can shine a spotlight on the Super PAC phenomenon and help apply pressure for change.”
Obama complaining about Citizens United is as tediously predictable as his blaming George Bush for all of his problems. And he knows it’s a reliable chunk of red meat for the far Left, which has a nearly religious dread of the fathomless evil unleashed by the Supreme Court’s decision that companies other than Big Media corporations get to exercise free speech, too.
Even before Citizens United came along, politicians commonly referred to their opponents’ donors as “special interests,” which are a perennial threat to the purity of democracy. Of course, the politician’s own top donors are absolutely never described as special interests. Thus, the President who gave billions away to his cronies in the great “green energy” boondoggle – the man who brought you Solyndra – constantly warns that the Citizens United decision will dangerously increase the influence of “special interests” in politics.
And everyone who finds himself losing any great struggle, political or otherwise, must grapple with the temptation to insist that the rules are unfairly slanted against him. Democrats long for the sort of slanted playing field in which political discourse would be completely dominated by a handful of media corporations strongly biased in their favor.
But a Constitutional amendment? Really, Mr. Obama? Of all the things we might add to the Constitution, you think we should be revising it to clamp down on political speech you don’t like? Even as a lazy sop to his fringe supporters, this is unworthy of the Presidency – and one of the many reasons to dismiss the current occupant of the office. There are far more urgent matters demanding the attention of the chief executive. We should be applying “pressure to change” our insolvent government, not silence people critical of it. And the Constitutional amendment process was not meant to be used as a spotlight for political theater.