About This Blog
Comedy Central's Stephen Colbert set out to prove what liberals already know to be true..that the Citizen's United v. FEC ruling allowing corporate campaign cash into American elections is an outrageously outrageous travesty of a sham of a travesty, and besides, the ruling will most likely result in more campaign funds going to, cringe, pro-business Republicans. No surprise liberals want that outlawed. Only Obama should be able to raise a billion campaign dollars, because he's special. He's a (cue the choir of angels) Democrat. Hosanna in the highest.
Colbert tried to setup a PAC to show how easily money could be used to influence our elections. Much to Colbert's satirical chagrin, he ended up satirizing himself. His efforts to create his PAC were thwarted time and again, as he ran into regulation after regulation governing corporate campaign donating.
At this time, I'm going to abdicate Da King's throne (barstool), and leave the rest of this post to John Hayward of Human Events. His comments about Colbert's self-satirizing pratfall are too good for me not to print in their entirety. Without further ado, heeeeere's Hayward !:
Comedian Stephen Colbert has filed papers with the Federal Election Commission to create the “Colbert Super-PAC,” a political action committee he intends as a satire of corporate political spending and the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision. As the Hollywood Reporter explains:
In 2010, the U.S. Supreme Court nixed federal laws that limited corporations from donating unlimited money to candidates and political causes. Many Republicans began taking advantage of the development by gaining tens of millions of dollars across the nation, and political observers believe it was one of the reasons why the party was able to take back the House of Representatives.
Colbert now wants to do the same, explaining he believes in the American Dream. "And that dream is simple," says Colbert. "That anyone, no matter who they are, if they are determined, if they are willing to work hard enough, someday they could grow up to create a legal entity which could then receive unlimited corporate funds, which could be used to influence our elections.”
This is said to spell trouble for Fox News, or more precisely for Fox News contributors who have their own PACs, like Sarah Palin, Mike Huckabee, and Karl Rove. If the FEC decides Colbert’s PAC is really a campaign contribution from the parent company of his television network, Comedy Central, it could lead to a lot of squinting and chin-pulling over the political action committees of the Fox contributors.
Colbert is right on target with his satire. Free speech is such a headache when everyone gets to participate! Especially evil corporations, which spend huge amounts of money to manipulate politics for their own interests… in sharp contrast to noble left-wing organizations, which spend huge amounts of money to manipulate politics for the good of all mankind.
What chance does an innocent mind have against that ocean of corporate political cash? How can we tolerate such distractions from the vital messages conveyed by important left-wing campaigns filled with millionaire celebrities? The messages built directly into the popular entertainment that spills from millions of theater screens, television sets, magazine pages, and music downloads are not enough to raise public awareness to the level of true enlightenment.
We should absolutely have draconian laws to prohibit corporations from influencing public opinion. Except for media corporations. They should be the only corporations allowed to have any influence, and theirs should be unlimited. Why not? They don’t have agendas or anything.
Well, most of them don’t. There are just too darned many media corporations influencing opinion these days. You’ve got sinister operations like Fox, and then you’ve got virtuous White House-approved truth tellers, like Comedy Central and al-Jazeera. Fox routinely crushes its competition in the ratings, so its influence is obviously an unfair and dangerous exercise of evil corporate power. Look at how many helpless viewers wander into their clutches, night after night, to be exposed to all those dangerous ideas!
What we really need, in order to protect the childlike American voter from having the soft clay of his opinions sculpted by titanium corporate scalpels, is some serious regulation of speech. At least during campaign season. Which begins two weeks after each election, and lasts until the next election. We could have two weeks of wild, unrestrained, free speech rumspringa every two years, but then the wise and highly educated monitors of officially regulated truth could go back into action.
Colbert deserves praise for calling our attention to the absurdity of political spending by American capitalist organs. They generate far too much noise, and drown out the sermon from the high priests at our officially approved media temples. Only a mind deprived of input can be truly free.
Indeed. Americans must be protected from all these unregulated...ideas.
- 2013 (55)
- 2012 (125)
- 2011 (167)
- 2010 (185)
- 2009 (228)
- 2008 (195)
- 2007 (72)