I didn't set out to write a political blog. If I write about politics a lot, it's because I don't know how the hell to keep my balance in this rolling flood of stinking brown slop. I've tagged myself a “liberal” all my life, but I don't even know what that label means anymore. For example, the recall elections last Tuesday in Wisconsin, my neighbor 20 miles to the east... Some of those political ads aired here. They were so devoid of meaningful content that they would have persuaded me of nothing except to stay home. I don't like organized labor any better than I like Koch Industries. Those two played Dueling Dollars, labor lost, and the public employees never had a chance.

But hey, that's nothing. Just wait until the house/senate uber-committee tries to negotiate a budget deal. We ain't seen nothin' yet. (And if you haven't rescued your 401k from the stock market yet, just sit back and try to enjoy the ride until you black out at 8 or 12 g's.) The best budget advice I've seen comes from a guy in Alaska named Jim Wright, who writes a wonderful blog at www.stonekettle.com:

You ever hear of old people before Social Security? No, no you did not. That’s right, Social Security causes old people! No Social Security, no old people. We’ll live forever! Get rid of Welfare and we’ll cure poverty too! Double Rainbow!


Blame isn't very helpful, but it feels good.  I blame the Supreme Court, at least for the moment. Socrates warned us that democracy was a bad idea and suggested we go with a group of philosopher-kings.  The SC is the closest thing we have, and they've saved our bacon more than once.  But this time they screwed the pooch big time. I refer, of course, to Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission.  (http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=000&invol=08-205#other1)

The gist of the SC ruling here is that restricting campaign contributions by corporations violates freedom of speech.  Think about that a minute.  Is GE or Koch Industries entitled to freedom of speech?  Is giving someone money even "speech?" 

In the dissenting opinion, Justice Stevens says:

In the context of election to public office, the distinction between corporate and human speakers is significant. Although they make enormous contributions to our society, corporations are not actually members of it. They cannot vote or run for office. Because they may be managed and controlled by nonresidents, their interests may conflict in fundamental respects with the interests of eligible voters. The financial resources, legal structure, and instrumental orientation of corporations raise legitimate concerns about their role in the electoral process. Our lawmakers have a compelling constitutional basis, if not also a democratic duty, to take measures designed to guard against the potentially deleterious effects of corporate spending in local and national races.

A majority of the court didn't see it that way, and the floodgates were opened.  Justice Kennedy wrote the ruling.  It's about as long as Orwell's 1984, and it's similar in other ways, too.  You can read it at the link posted above if you're a masochist.

It's my sincere hope that as the budget battles and electioneering heat up, a great mass of Americans will exercise their right to self-defense, shoot their TVs, and toss the carcasses into the streets. 

And I swear... If we elect another Texan to the White House I'm walking north and never looking back.