John Roberts’s AmericaLet me make it easy on you. This joker doesn't have the first clue as to whether corporations (or unions) are funding those "shadowy" outside groups. Not one funding list has ever been made public. That "gusher is courtesy of the 5-to-4 Supreme Court decision in January that allowed unlimited campaign spending by corporations and unions" is, on its face, a position that is completely undefendable with the known facts.
By Timothy Egan
Colorado Springs, Colo. — I wish Chief Justice John Roberts could spend a day and a night in the Rocky Mountains experiencing what his activist Supreme Court majority has dumped on the American voter in 2010.
The sludge flow from out-of-state, secretive political groups is unrelenting. All hours. All mediums. A football game-break brings three attacks in a row, calling a senator a liar, a vandal and a glutton for debt. A weather update is interrupted by a trio of hits from the other side, making the challenger out to be the worst thing for women since Neanderthal man took up a club as an accessory to romance.
Colorado is ground zero for what’s happening in John Roberts’s America, competing for the dubious distinction of being the top state in the nation for spending by shadowy outside groups telling people how to vote.
This gusher is courtesy of the 5-to-4 Supreme Court decision in January that allowed unlimited campaign spending by corporations and unions. That was the ruling, which will go down in infamy, where the court said that corporations had the same free speech rights as ordinary citizens. [link]
But so what? What laws have been broken? What harm has been inflicted? Who's been damaged?
If your first words are "Well, they have contributed to the dissemination of misinformation," my response is:
Welcome to U.S. politics, circa 1889 to 2010.
Want to go down the list of candidates and political parties that done just that?
Instead I'll list those that haven't tossed out untruths over the last 200 years:
- ...... -
And if the complaint is that there are too many TV and radio commercials in 2010 because of the proliferation of cash donations to political campaigns - an argument with which I have a certain amount of sympathy - is 2010 any different from 2008?
So what's different about 2010? Liberals are about to get their asses handed to them come election day and they're fretting over the unfairness of it.
But why pick on "shady" outside groups? Why not just go to the heart of the matter and do what NPR did to Juan Williams and silence all dissent? That's really what these "open-minded" lefties want, when it comes down to it, isn't it? One Message, One World, One Big Brother?
Anonymous groups are funding campaign ads. God have mercy.
- - -
* I should note that there are still laws relating to defamation out there. If the potential for libel or slander are what's gotten these liberals whimpering, there are courts set up to deal with such things. And at that time, you can bet a good plaintiff's lawyer can find out who is behind those political ads.
So sue them if there's a problem.
And quit whining.