evolution

Lyle Denniston of the indispensable SCOTUSblog:

President Obama ordered his aides on Thursday “to get to work immediately with Congress” to develop “a forceful response” to the Supreme Court’s ruling in the Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission case. In a statement, the President denounced the decision, saying it “has given a green light to a new stampede of special interest money in our politics.” It was obvious, therefore, that he was interested in working with Congress to overturn the decision, or at least to narrow it significantly.

Unless he has in mind an amendment to the Constitution, however, it is most unclear at this point whether the lawmakers could do anything — or much of anything — to cut down on “special interest money” in American politics. This was a constitutional decision, laying down (essentially for the first time), a sweeping free-speech right in politics for “special interest” bodies of all types with the concept of “speech” clearly embracing spending money to influence election outcomes. If individuals have considerable freedom to express themselves politically, corporations, labor unions, and other “special interest” entities now do, too.

In Washington and today pretty much everywhere else, “Special interest” = “people who refuse to donate to me or my favored causes”. Naturally, the Court decided to leave a little bit of onion dip in the un-Constitutional bowl and not strike down McCain-Feingold in its entirety. rofl.

Which brings us to… a challenger for Feingold? One out of two ain’t bad. rofl.

State Attorney General begs judiciary not to order state to spend money it doesn’t have on things that won’t do any good. rofl.

Kansas governor’s race: You know what – all I need is a reason to like Tom Holland. His record’s a decent one in my book. I’m just in such a dark place in my heart right now that I don’t want to support anything “progressives” support. If anyone needs protection at just this moment in history, it’s from them. I’m sure that one speech by Sam Brownback will cause me to snap out of it, though. rofl.

I’ll believe it when I see the statues come tumbling down and the ayatollahs’ heads on a pike, figuratively or literally.

Wake me up when — more likely, if — that happens.

Reason’s Brian Doherty discovers a new phenomenon.

You know, someone should probably write about this.

UPDATE: Another, just in case there’s anyone left who hasn’t made up their mind.

How good could it possibly be?

Nobody’s surprised, right? I mean, really?

1. Studying at the desired level of effort
2. Trimming back my leg hair
3. Getting bombed on Kentucky’s Gentleman whisky and heckling hobos
4. Cleaning
5. Watching U.S. Open tennis
6. Reading the latest 9/11 conspiracy-theory cranks on lawrence.com
7. Writing meaningful blog posts

… what?

The “non-prescription” kind. It’s something we should consider here in the States, in my opinion — but it will never happen. The “war on drugs” is a cash cow for many jurisdictions, and if / when the government gets around to managing health care, they’re going to manage health care.

The biggest domestic issue in the media today just happens to be the one that intersects the most with my chosen career. I actually know something about it. And I can’t talk about any of it.

Neat, huh?

UPDATE: Oh, and the whole being called a Nazi astroturfer thing.

But I’m a non-leftist in the blogosphere and the age of Obama, so I should be used to that…