From The L.A. Times:
Reporting from Washington – Amid a rebirth of conservative activism that could help Republicans win elections next year, some party insiders now fear that extreme rhetoric and conspiracy theories coming from the angry reaches of the conservative base are undermining the GOP’s broader credibility and casting it as the party of the paranoid.
I am very pleased that the Republican Party is in turmoil right now, and I hope eventually the entire party will be relegated to “fringe” status by the voting public. But all is not well– there’s a troubling story for me over at The Economist:
The Supreme Court is, to all appearances, preparing to scrap 100 years of its own precedents and throw out the laws that have, since 1907 and 1947, barred corporations from direct contributions and spending in federal elections.
Just great. And the fact that some people are angrily in favor of the bullshit that allows corporations the same free speech rights afforded to real, individual human beings makes me feel sick (more about those freaks in the first half of this entry). That some people cannot see that multimillionaires have infinitely more “free speech” than the average citizen is maddening. I really want to sneak up behind these idiots and yell into their ears from an inch away at the top of my lungs, “STOP VOTING AGAINST YOUR INTERESTS AND THE INTERESTS OF THE REST OF THE PUBLIC, YOU DELUSIONAL KNOW-NOTHING CONSERVATIVE PRICK!!!” These lowlifes operate as though they were the elite fat cats who benefit from all this pro-corporate crap, and there is no reason for their behavior other than watching FOX News and believing that there is such a thing as “White America” and that they are part of it and that it is being threatened by anyone other than the rich and powerful. I really like some of the comments on the article, including this one:
Can you explain how individual US citizen rights are diminished in any way by preventing fictitious legal entities that are aggregations of said US citizens (plus foreign citizens and other fictitious legal entities both domestic and foreign) from influencing the outcome of elections?
It seems to me that individual US citizens can exercise their freedom of speech without any infringement whatsoever without giving additional free speech “rights” to fictitious legal entities whose sole raison de etre is to maximize profits (NOT look after the well being of citizens or the country)
Does anyone know if the founding fathers intended for fictitious legal entities to share the rights of actual human citizens?
And it’s getting old spelling out the obvious, but I feel like part of the problem if I never say anything, and I feel like most people aren’t even aware of the obvious, or it’s too far-fetched sounding to be credible; you know that lazy, root-of-all-American-problems kind of sentiment: “If I can’t see charts with graphics or pictures of shady men shaking hands with suitcases full of money in a back-alley deal behind the Capitol, then there’s nothing I can do or even want to do to believe it, much less change it!”
The overwhelming majority of people don’t care to be active in this democracy, including the fat cats. The difference? The fat cats can throw money at something and the rest of the barely-interested only care about what’s for dinner and can you believe what Kanye did to Taylor Swift?!?