First we have the biting satire from Stephen Colbert on this, the worst Supreme Court decision since Dred Scott. It makes the political decision of Bush V Gore look like non partisan child’s play.
CNN legal scholar Jeffery Tobin adda a bit of gravitas to this election changing game.
Looking into this a big further a few things struck me. First of all how purely political it is. The five conservative Republicans on the court are in lock step to bring this up and override 100 years of precedent and knowingly – with malice a forethought – further hand over our election process to those who have not only the most money, but who are driven only by profit rather than any issue of common good.
No limits on money handed to politicians or the media so Exxon/Mobile can foul the planet.
No limits on Cigna/WellPoint to create even more death cubicles sending grandma to rescission Hell.
No limits on Rush Limbaugh EIB network spending his 240 million a year on a media blitz to put his music video of Barack The Magic Negro across the networks 24/7.
Antonin "Benito" Scalia was of course the most dishonest of the gang by centering his questions around the silly business that if not acted upon it would deny free political speech to the mom and pop owners of your local Quickee Mart. I mean really. Yeah that’s what this is about? No, this is about this last election where the wealthy Right lost to a… a… Uppity… A uppity… A uppity liberal… Hmmm…
[After hearing President Jimmy Carter last night say that a very substantial part of this anger at President Obama is racism, and Mornin’ Joe Scarborough declare that is just not true, I guess I must defer to the one time Congressman from the most radical racist right-wing doctor shooting area of America, the Florida Panhandle.]
This Supreme Court decision is perfectly tuned to the base ideology of these kind of people who not only believe that corporations with the most money should have the most speech – so much speech it displaces the speech of actual people – but also who strongly believe that those with the most money should receive the best health care and the best justice – as this case so well suggests.