On Jan. 21, 2010, the U.S. Supreme Court threw out 100 years of established law and legal precedent that protected the integrity of our political process against direct campaign expenditures by big-money special interests. The most important things Congress can do in response to this ruling are to increase transparency and shine a light on the special interests trying to influence elections. That is why we have introduced the bipartisan DISCLOSE (Democracy Is Strengthened by Casting Light on Spending in Elections) Act. The bill requires the disclosure of political spending by special interests, keeps foreign-controlled companies from affecting America’s elections, and ensures that entities that receive large amounts of taxpayer money can’t turn around and spend that money in campaigns. The DISCLOSE Act ensures that Americans will know when a company or labor union is seeking to influence campaigns. It prevents special interests from hiding behind third-party groups, sham organizations and dummy corporations by requiring the heads of organizations to “stand by their ad” the same way political candidates must take personal responsibility for their ads. — Reps. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., and Mike Castle, R-Del., Washington Post
The cynical decision by House Democrats to exempt the National Rifle Association from the latest campaign finance regulatory scheme is itself a public disclosure. It reveals the true purpose of the perversely named DISCLOSE Act (H.R. 5175): namely, to silence congressional critics. Congress can’t help itself. Incumbent politicians yearn for legal duct tape for their opponents’ mouths. The DISCLOSE Act is a doozy of a muzzle. It would impose onerous and complicated “disclosure” restrictions on organizations that dare to engage in constitutionally protected political speech and on corporations that dare to contribute to such organizations. The DISCLOSE Act isn’t really intended to elicit information not currently required by law. The act serves notice on certain speakers that their involvement in the political process will exact a high price of regulation, penalty and notoriety, using disclosure and reporting as a subterfuge to chill their political speech and association. It is a scheme hatched by political insiders to eradicate disfavored speech. — Cleta Mitchell, Washington Post
President Obama may not be ready to draw conclusions about the success or failure of his Afghanistan surge, but a variety of pundits are. “There is no overall game plan, no real strategy or coherent goals, to guide the fighting of U.S. forces. It’s just a mind-numbing, soul-chilling, body-destroying slog, month after month, year after pointless year,” 
President Obama is “going to use the Gulf disaster to immediately push a new energy bill through Congress. I got an idea. How about first using the Gulf disaster to fix the Gulf disaster?” — Jay Leno