RIGHT SPEAK: Hillary Calls For Constitutional Limits On Free Speech

You may very well have missed it. But at her first 2016 campaign stop in Iowa Tuesday, wannabe president Hillary Clinton called for a constitutional amendment if necessary to limit free speech rights granted by the Supreme Court to unions, companies and organizations donating to political campaigns.

Few might have expected the ex-Obama aide to kick off her second bid to infiltrate the Oval Office with such a proposal for fundamental change in settled American law. But there she was wearing an uber-smile with more media than audience at Kirkland Community College in Monticello (get the Thomas Jefferson link?).

First, she modestly portrayed herself as somewhat courageous for taking on some evil special interest groups. Because, as her divisive mentor Barack Obama so ably shows, you must have a "Them" to create an "Us." Hillary proclaimed:

"I want to be the champion who goes to bat for Americans in four big areas, four big fights that I think we have to take on because there are those who don’t agree with what I think we should be doing. And they’re pretty powerful forces."

Topic One: "We need to build the economy of tomorrow, not yesterday." Take that, Marco Rubio, who's called her a yesterday leader. (Scroll down for video of her remarks.)

Topic Two: "We need to strengthen families and communities because that’s where it all starts." Remember her 1996 book, "It Takes a Village"?

Topic Four (yes, it's out of order but play along): "We need to protect our country from the threats that we see and the ones that are on the horizon."

Purposely not specific. With Clinton, "threats" could be anything from the "vast right-wing conspiracy" to the media to, gee, here's a thought, maybe even terrorism threats that have exploded since she took office as Secretary of State in early 2009.

Topic Three: "We need to fix our dysfunctional political system and get unaccountable money out of it once and for all—even if that takes a constitutional amendment."

Wait! What? Yup, the woman with her own PACs who could spend upwards of $1.7 billion on her campaign is taking on the 2010 Citizens United Supreme Court decision. That one granted free speech spending rights to nonprofit organizations in the political process, since expanded to unions and corporations.