Supreme Court Decides There's Not Enough Money in Politics

Image from source, Wonkette

Wednesday's Supreme Court decision to strike some campaign finance laws has me bugged. The 2010 Citizens United decision unleashed the floodgates of shady money, and we've seen the result in just crazy saturation of political ads. Money choses candidates. Even the GOP lost out last time, when Mitt Romney won the money wars then lost the election (yes, Karl Rove, he really did lose).

But SCOTUS wasn't done. It's still too restrictive for the poor rich donors. Money equals speech they say, and apparently, more money equals more speech. You aren't a gazillionaire? So sorry, your message will henceforth be drowned out! It sucks. It's sucks hard. And it's not over. Justice Clarence "Coke Can" Thomas thinks there should be no restrictions! So there's that to look forward to.

[Excerpt]

Supreme Court Decides Citizens United Part Two: The Dickening

. . .This morning, the Supreme Court handed down a decision in McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission. Why do you care? Because this sucker is this year’s Citizens United, and you can practically hear your right to free and fair elections tick tick ticking away, America. Where Citizens gave us those cool-ass SuperPACs so that people like Sheldon Adelson can throw $10 million at one candidate but it is totally not at one candidate because SuperPACs are magic. But wait! That didn’t really work out very well and those meddling Democrats STILL won things and we STILL haven’t broken the election system enough to completely exclude the blahs and the poors. . .

Read more at: Wonkette