We should Amend The Constitution to Overturn Citizens United

With compliments to my opponent Dearthebearnc, it has been refreshing to hear someone who denies the wisdom of the Citizens United decision speak accurately on the subject. So many people speak with lack of knowledge and parrot the myth "The Court said corporations are people" the court never said that and I applaud Db (Dearthebearnc) for not sickening me with such annoying ignorance. The only correction I have to make is that he called reporting on politics a "Donation". The BCRA is not about "Donations" it is about "Electioneering". It is unusual to meet someone that has even heard about the BCRA. A law that the establishment does not want you to know about. A law I have paid close attention to since the turn of the century. Here is what Db is not telling you, Db wants to imprison authors, filmmakers, pamphleteers, bloggers, publishers and anyone else who reports on politics if he deems them a "Non-Journalist". The Citizens United case was about a person, David Bosie, being threatened by the Bush administration with 5 years in prison for film-making. A vote in favor of "Pro" for this debate is a vote in favor of giving government power to imprison filmmakers, authors, publishers etc.... for political speech. You have to ask yourself "Do I want the government to decide who is a journalist and who is not?" Why is Rush Limbaugh and his corporate producers free to denounce or acclaim politicians but NAACP leadership is threatened with prison for doing the same thing? What Db wants here is to effectively license journalism as if we are some totalitarian state with a disregarded constitution. I can only make assumption as to why the "licensed" journalists fail to report on this power to ban books. Some of you are surely shaking your head in disbelief. "This Patulous is madd" "This can not be true" "The United States would never threaten Prison for speaking of politics". I have a link to the Supreme court argument that confirms this nefarious law. The Obama administration admits to this power but assures us it would never imprison an author but would imprison a filmmaker. A link to this clip that was suspiciously taken down from YouTube four years ago based on copyright infringement. I can say "Suspiciously" because I thought these hearings were open to the public. I searched for these links for years until I found one on a file-sharing website. Here is the only surviving link I know of that exposes the administration desperately clinging to the power to imprison authors and anoint journalists. The administration actually tells the court that any writers imprisoned could win an "As Applied" challenge in court. As if everyone has tens of millions of dollars and years of time to go through the Federal Court system. ( https://www.youtube.com... ). To form opinions on this case through information meted out to you by likes of agenda driven souls like Bill O'Rielly or Rachel Maddow is foolishly remiss. We need to hear from the court and its debate first hand. That is why I implore everyone to read the opinion and dissent on this case. I have read them and surprisingly found that all nine justices agreed that David Bosie of Citizens United had his civil rights violated. The dissent was a mad rant by Stevens screaming that they should not have acted at all on this law the BCRA. Steven's reason for inaction and dissent was based on a technicality regarding David Bose's challenge being "Facial" or "As applied". For some reason Db lists donors of campaign contributions when this debate is about reinstating the BCRA and has nothing to do with campaign contributions. Typical tactic of "Hey look over here..pay no attention to the 500 pound gorilla" This debate has to do with the BCRA banning books just as Db has admitted to. Db wants to imprison some writers for their speech because he doesn't like what some groups of people have to say while allowing corporations he favors, like General Electric, to spew all the "Electioneering" they want. Db sells this to the masses by saying "I will protect you from dishonest people that will steer your vote upon a sea of fallacy". If you step back a moment and think about this Db is actually saying "You are so terribly lacking in common sense that you need me to decide who can report on American politics. Lets not let your stupidity get in the way of democracy. I will decree who can report to you and who can not. Glen Beck thumbs up...Michael Moore Thumbs down...Chris Williams thumbs up...David Bosie thumbs down. Trust me" That effectively is what Db is saying to the American masses.