“corporate limits on campaign spending a form of censorship.” — quote.

the ghost of dubya bush strikes again: some­thing passed last week that’s prob­a­bly going to destroy whatever’s left of fox-dominated amer­i­can democ­racy. for the aver­age amer­i­can cit­i­zen, anyway.

with the appoint­ments of alito and roberts (with his dad’s con­tri­bu­tion of thomas), a 5–4 deci­sion by the supreme court is now allow­ing unlim­ited cor­po­rate cam­paign spend­ing.  con­cerned amer­i­cans should be pissed — your country’s top judges basi­cally just over­threw about a 100 years worth of leg­is­la­tion pro­tect­ing the aver­age voter and gov­ern­ment from bla­tant cor­po­rate interests.

when the major­ity deci­sion was released, the judges actu­ally defended it by invok­ing the first amend­ment, and that curb­ing cor­po­rate spend­ing in elec­tions is uncon­sti­tu­tional and a form of cen­sor­ship. brilliant.

there’s already a huge air of cyn­i­cism when it comes to elec­toral pol­i­tics — dis­in­for­ma­tion via media, spin, what­ever. and peo­ple who thought that elec­tions are bought now, well… i think it’s safe to say that you’ve seen noth­ing yet.

this has its roots in cor­po­rate law and how the law sees a cor­po­rate entity as hav­ing the same rights as an indi­vid­ual. just absolutely bru­tal. in stark irony, there are still cam­paign dona­tion lim­its on reg­u­lar people.

not unex­pected, the cor­po­rate news enti­ties haven’t really made this a big deal. i won­der why.

2012 will be inter­est­ing. for rea­sons aside from the total destruc­tion of civ­i­liza­tion and the world as we know it.

Mirrored from fully automatic.