Money Changes Everything

Remember the good old days when it was considered gauche to point out that the Supreme Court is a political entity and that the current five right-wingers will find any justification to do whatever fits their ideology.

Good times.

Share On Facebook
Share On Twitter
Share On Google Plus
Share On Pinterest
Share On Reddit

59 replies
  1. 1
    Belafon (Formerly anonevent) says:

    Shooting at Fort Hood.

  2. 2
    muddy says:

    Legislating from the bench!

  3. 3
    Baud says:

    They’re just calling balls and strikes.

  4. 4
    PsiFighter37 says:

    Originalism uber alles. Suck it libtards!

  5. 5

    Will put this tweet from Pat Dollard at Breitbart here as well re: what to do about the muslim menace. Sorry for OT

  6. 6
    Comrade Jake says:

    One does wonder how the ruling would have gone if the vast majority of PACs were liberal, backed by progressive billionaires. I assume that under those circumstances, Scalia would have ruled that money impinges on free speech.

  7. 7
    balconesfault says:

    The Roberts Court … Ralph Nader’s ongoing gift to America.

    Because we all know there’s no different between Republicans and Democrats, right?

  8. 8
    COB says:

    Ya gets the Court that ya pay for.

    In my fantasy world a meteor takes out the next Federalist meeting. That would help a lot.

  9. 9
    JPL says:

    John, Because of the Citizen United ruling, the only fair thing to do is open up the spigots and let it flow. The constitution guarantees us the right of freedom to spend money to buy elections. It’s kinda like we have the best health care that money can buy.

    @ranchandsyrup: Saw that down below and commented.

  10. 10
    Betty Cracker says:

    @ranchandsyrup: God, what a sick fuck!

  11. 11
    PsiFighter37 says:

    Also, too, there’s no difference between Bush and Gore.

  12. 12
    SatanicPanic says:

    @ranchandsyrup: that’s one way to get attention

    EDIT- referring to Pat’s tweet, not your comment.

  13. 13
    Roger Moore says:


    They’re just calling balls and strikes.

    About as well as Eric Gregg in Game 5 of the 1997 NLCS.

  14. 14
  15. 15
    Joey Giraud says:

    @Comrade Jake:

    I wonder who these so-called “progressive” billionaires are.

    Finding ways to grab huge piles of cash isn’t a progressive thing.

    George Soros doesn’t count, he’s not really progressive, more a man with an anti-communist mania.

  16. 16

    @Betty Cracker: He’s a good guy with a gun. Because he’s white and believes in the proper deity. QEDD. The second D is for dumbass.

  17. 17


  18. 18
    Roger Moore says:


    The second D is for dumbass.

    But hell if he knows what the first three letters mean.

  19. 19
    Joey Giraud says:

    I’m of the belief that campaign finance laws are rather like chastity belts; ineffective attempts to rout the forces of nature.

    Money will always talk. We need to keep people from amassing such huge wealth in the first place.

    We have to stop thinking of great wealth as a reward for good behavior. It’s not.

    Hard work will only get you modest wealth, great wealth requires dirty tricks and sneaky laws.

  20. 20
    balconesfault says:

    @PsiFighter37: Every time I have some fundraising e-mail or letter screaming about how some election is “THE MOST IMPORTANT IN OUR LIFETIME”, I think sorry – we already had that one in 2000 … and we f***ed it up

    Everything since has just been fighting over how best to clean up the mess.

  21. 21
  22. 22

    So the only postive legislation President John McCain contributed as a Senator has been officially and finally gutted by the very men he helped put in place.

  23. 23

    saw this on the twitters re: Dollard:

    The booze and dope fueled many crazy antics, and in the spring of 2004, cops handcuffed Dollard and carted him off to the psych unit of an L.A. hospital.

    “Around this time he began his political conversion,” Wright notes. “Somewhere between the Roman orgy and the mental ward he became a staunch supporter of George W. Bush’s.”

    He showed his support for the war in Iraq by accessorizing his Hummer with a vanity plate that read US WINS.

  24. 24
    Roger Moore says:

    @Joey Giraud:

    Money will always talk. We need to keep people from amassing such huge wealth in the first place.

    Which is why they’re so eager to buy up politicians: so laws separating them from their money won’t pass.

  25. 25
    Violet says:

    @balconesfault: Agreed.

    @ranchandsyrup: Good Lord, that’s horrific. Those people are sociopaths.

  26. 26
    SatanicPanic says:


    After his fourth wife left him because she got upset about his hobbies, which included cocaine and hookers

    Sounds like a class act

  27. 27
    Joey Giraud says:

    @Roger Moore:

    Making that battle that must eventually happen worse.

    Sooner or later, we *will* roll this back. The only question is whether it happens with or without horrible carnage.

    Gotev Je? Let’s hope.

  28. 28
    JPL says:

    In honor of the Supreme Cts latest ruling might I suggest this song.

  29. 29
    Penus says:

    @balconesfault: Not a dime’s worth!

  30. 30

    I’ve decided we have to do something about the Court; they will wreck us if we do not act. Part of the Judicial Oath says “I will […] do equal right to the poor and to the rich […]” I’m feeling like a conservative bird today; I’ve decided that keeping ones word is really important. Now can we start the impeachment proceedings?

  31. 31
    Emerald says:

    @Joey Giraud:

    Hard work will only get you modest wealth, great wealth requires dirty tricks and sneaky laws.


    Hard work might make you into a millionaire, if you’re also extremely lucky and persistent.

    But if you’re a billionaire, one way or another, you’re a thief.

  32. 32
    balconesfault says:

    @Raven Onthehill: Justice Roberts will no doubt point out that he’s eliminating the restrictions that keep the poor from contributing $6 million directly to candidates in any political cycle.

  33. 33
    Captain C says:

    @Roger Moore:

    About as well as Eric Gregg

    I’m pretty sure I once saw Eric Gregg call a strike on a thigh high pickoff throw.

    And it was still better judgement than Scalia, Alito, Thomas, and (usually) Roberts ever show.

  34. 34
    muricafukyea says:

    2 of those guys were appointed by the 1 guy you voted for twice.

    As far as I’m concerned you lost most of your rights to piss and moan about those 5 guys because of that as well as all the other cluster fucks that G. Dubya the Texas sized dummy created when you voted for that moron twice.

    Also, you often do everything you can to disenfranchise voters with a lot of your constant complaints about Obama and Democrats. Either directly or projected through your gated Brazilian community hero Griftwald. Also your “we should just give up” posts don’t help. Fair to say this one falls into that category as well. You’re just another hyprocrit. In other words you are part of the problem.

  35. 35
    GregB says:

    In regards to Dollard’s fascist fantasy Tweets.

    This is the 20 year mark for the Rwandan genocide.

    The talk of killing ones political enemies is poison that can lead to the collapse of societies.

  36. 36
    Comrade Jake says:

    @Joey Giraud: that’s kind of my point. There really isn’t an analog to the Kochs on the left. Were that the case, I suspect we might have had a very different ruling.

  37. 37
    Roger Moore says:


    The talk of killing ones political enemies is poison that can lead to the collapse of societies.

    Thatcher said there is no such thing as society, so why should they be afraid of killing it?

  38. 38
    Disco says:

    You can blame Nader, but really what did it was the gay marriage ban in Ohio in 2004.

  39. 39
    Mnemosyne says:

    I think had the best headline:

    Supreme Court Says Politicians Need More Money Thrown At Them

  40. 40
    dedc79 says:

    Got on a flight today to Hartford from DC and who did I see sitting in first class, but Justice Scalia. I was tempted to ask who paid for his ticket.

  41. 41
    kindness says:

    For all the outrageous shit that Republicans/Teahaddists/those 5 Supreme Court members have bandied about since Obama took over I am shocked no one has done something really stupid like go after them. I mean, I know how it would be poetic/karmic justice but it would just fan the flames of those people. I don’t want another civil war here. Sadly some of my opponents do it seems to me.

    The French were right when they had their revolution I’m beginning to believe.

  42. 42
    trollhattan says:


    Anybody figure out why he can’t seem to spell “Dullard”?

  43. 43
    ruemara says:

    @dedc79: I’d be tempted to slug him or slip some oleander in his gin.

  44. 44
    dedc79 says:

    @ruemara: I also thought about throwing my loose change at him and telling him i was exercising my right to free speech, now that it’s clear that money and speech are the same thing.

  45. 45
    Ian says:


    hobbies, which included cocaine and hookers

    Wow. Good to know my vices are now hobbies.

  46. 46
    coin operated says:

    Weapons-grade hatred/stupid there.


  47. 47
    danielx says:

    Remember the good old days when it was considered gauche to point out that the Supreme Court is a political entity and that the current five right-wingers will find any justification to do whatever fits their ideology.

    Yeah, that would have been prior to December 12th, 2000 – the day the Supremes handed down the Bush v. Gore decision.

  48. 48
    coin operated says:

    I remember visiting Versailles and the guide telling me “this was the hunting lodge of the French elite”. I fully understood the French revolution at that point.

    Historically speaking, revolutions occur when the haves are obviously fucking over the have-nots. We’re not quite there yet, but I see this ruling as one more step towards our own Bolshevik uprising.

  49. 49
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @coin operated: Versailles didn’t to that for me. OTOH, being in a small church in Bruges and seeing the vast wealth in that little place just because some cloth that supposedly had some of Jesus’s blood on it was stored there made me appreciate the Reformation.

  50. 50
    StringOnAStick says:

    @Omnes Omnibus: Going to the Hapsburg’s summer palace (Vienna) did it for me. As soon as we exited the tour I turned to my husband and said I totally understood why people anywhere revolt against such egregious excess, and they damned well should.

  51. 51
    gian says:


    did you have 30 pieces of silver?

  52. 52
    BruinKid says:

    @Belafon (Formerly anonevent): Shit, when I saw your comment this afternoon, I actually thought you were making a joke off of Cole’s “Remember the good old days…” comment, and didn’t see the horrible news until just now. Ugh.

  53. 53
    gian says:

    @coin operated:

    it was the textbook anecdotes of the running people over with horse and carriage (children) and then tossing the equivalent of a couple bucks to the family before taking off again, that shocked me.

    our inheriting class is so fucking ignorant that they just do not have a clue. and our courts are not giving them one. The Dupont heir who is a convicted baby raper gets no jail because it would be too hard for him.
    so much for the three year old daughter he raped. too bad she didn’t have a judge to stop it from happening ’cause it was too hard on her.

  54. 54
    burnspbesq says:

    There is a natural human tendency to hate what you don’t understand.

    In Cole’s case, that extends to the First Amendment.

  55. 55
    Paul in KY says:

    @Joey Giraud: Try getting the TV people (all of whom have great wealth) to advance that meme.

  56. 56
    Steve says:

    Oh come on! That idea of judicial neutrality died and was buried when they stole the 2000 presidential election in broad daylight. I have no patience for lawyers who say that Bush vs Gore was a terrible decision but that the legal system works and life goes on. No! It was an abomination and an utter abrogation of the principles of our democracy and society. Shame on us all for “getting over it” so quickly!

  57. 57
    Johannes says:

    I understand the First Amendment, burnspbesq, and this decision is an abomination for two reasons: (1) while paying lip service to the notion that donations to campaigns are not pure speech, the plurality opinion nonetheless treats them as such; and (2) the opinion reiterates the artificially narrow definition in CU of corruption Congress can act to prevent to specific quid pro quo transactions; paying for access and gratitude, even if it leads to favorable treatment is not corruption unless such favorable treatment was previously planned and agreed.

    And just in case you don’t think I understand the First Amendment, I’ve taught it, litigated it before courts including the Supremes, and published a book on it, as well as eight law review articles. Cole is right on this one, you’re wrong.

  58. 58
    burnspbesq says:


    My view of the scope of First Amendment protection for core political speech does a much better job than yours of predicting outcomes. So who understands what?

  59. 59
    Johannes says:

    I predicted the outcome, burns. As a piece of political hack work, and continuing the corporatist tilt begun by Buckley, made worse by CU, and exacerbated now.

    It’s the legitimacy of the ruling I’m assailing, not claiming it’s a surprise.

    My point is that in your comment to Cole, you intimated that to hate this outcome is to not understand, and indeed to hate, the First Amendment. I think that’s an absurd view, and a way of using your professional qualifications to shout John down. So I pointed out that one can understand and love free speech, and find this line of decisions abhorrent, and that, having spent a goodly part of my career litigating and writing about the First Amendment, I’m pretty sure that reaction is an informed one.

Comments are closed.