This is only a Preview!

You must Publish this diary to make this visible to the public,
or click 'Edit Diary' to make further changes first.

Posting a Diary Entry

Daily Kos welcomes blog articles from readers, known as diaries. The Intro section to a diary should be about three paragraphs long, and is required. The body section is optional, as is the poll, which can have 1 to 15 choices. Descriptive tags are also required to help others find your diary by subject; please don't use "cute" tags.

When you're ready, scroll down below the tags and click Save & Preview. You can edit your diary after it's published by clicking Edit Diary. Polls cannot be edited once they are published.

If this is your first time creating a Diary since the Ajax upgrade, before you enter any text below, please press Ctrl-F5 and then hold down the Shift Key and press your browser's Reload button to refresh its cache with the new script files.


  1. One diary daily maximum.
  2. Substantive diaries only. If you don't have at least three solid, original paragraphs, you should probably post a comment in an Open Thread.
  3. No repetitive diaries. Take a moment to ensure your topic hasn't been blogged (you can search for Stories and Diaries that already cover this topic), though fresh original analysis is always welcome.
  4. Use the "Body" textbox if your diary entry is longer than three paragraphs.
  5. Any images in your posts must be hosted by an approved image hosting service (one of: imageshack.us, photobucket.com, flickr.com, smugmug.com, allyoucanupload.com, picturetrail.com, mac.com, webshots.com, editgrid.com).
  6. Copying and pasting entire copyrighted works is prohibited. If you do quote something, keep it brief, always provide a link to the original source, and use the <blockquote> tags to clearly identify the quoted material. Violating this rule is grounds for immediate banning.
  7. Be civil. Do not "call out" other users by name in diary titles. Do not use profanity in diary titles. Don't write diaries whose main purpose is to deliberately inflame.
For the complete list of DailyKos diary guidelines, please click here.

Please begin with an informative title:

Just a quick Hat Tip to Alex Wagner for something well put

Chief inJustice Roberts:

 “spending large sums of money in connection with elections does not give rise to quid pro quo corruption. Nor does the possibility that an individual that spends large sums may garner influence over elected officials:”
Bill Maher responds:
 “Either he is a liar, or he is too naïve to hold any important job, including and especially this one. This is like a legal ruling written by the Little Mermaid”

Link to video in case it gets pulled from youtube:  http://www.mediaite.com/...

Alex Wagner:

 “When you look at yourselves and the position you’re arguing here, it is simultaneously ..the Roberts court..the legacy of the Roberts court will be allowing the corporations and wealthy individuals to gerrymander and jury rig the electoral process at the same time that the courts are trying to make it harder for people to exercise their right to vote. If that is the side of history you are on we are in two different worlds.”
Tom Davis (R):
“I think campaign finance [regulation] was well intended but all it did was starve the parties of money . This decision strengthens parties. I think that is a good thing”
I’ve heard this 'superpac vs political party' argument before and it exposes something about republicans that they've gotten away with far too long. Their neo-con mindset. In almost every "fix" to a problem is an excuse for more war. Whether that war is about invading a country or settling a dispute over campaign finance law.
  As an example; when republicans see one country that has nuclear WMD’s  threatening or attacking another country without WMD, the republican solution is to arm the non WMD country. Add more explosive tinder to the situation - and make money on it

Or for another example. When there is a mass shooting in a school yard, a theatre, a bar.. wherever; the republican fix? Arm the teachers and in some GOP circles -> Arm the students themselves. – insane.  When the obvious answer is to get rid of the threat, not double down on it to “even things up” - and make money on it

The goal should be get the big money influence the hell out of elections, not 'let's even things up" with even more money.

And in fact this whole 'superpac vs political party' GOP meme itself is also false. Only 571 individuals hit the limit. It is those few 1%ers that are being given this additional electoral leverage. So to say this ruling should be understood as merely to help "strengthen"political parties in order to compete with superpacs is just more republicans spin

Alex Wagner straightens the republican slant:

“this is the issue. This is the most important issue.. is making sure that the 571 Americans that maxed out on contributions last year should be able to give even more money, and at the same time,  let’s make sure it’s harder for old people and people of color and young people to vote.”
I pretty much ignored Carrie Sheffield who piped up with this old republican dud:  
“Can we say Carly Fiorina? Can we say all these failed candidates that pumped millions of their own money in this state alone..”  [blah, blah, blah,] “the liberals broke the system” [ blah blah..] “Obama..”
As if one bad candidate losing after burning through gobs of disposable cash proves that big cash gave no advantage to those most wealthy. Wealth can be a powerful deodorant but some candidates & campaigns just suck too bad

Bill Maher sums her comments up:

"..again.. Excuse me, that sheds light on nothing."
Alex Wagner has done a bang up job focusing the argument into direct uncomplicated terms. Keeping it simple helps me to spread the word, so I really appreciate Alex Wagner's sense of things on these points:  

• Following Citizens United, and gutting of the VRA, McCutcheon v FEC hands over even more power to only 571 of the wealthiest individuals and no one else who by contrast, are left fighting, not just to be heard, but to hold onto their right to vote at all  

• Republicans and the RWNJ Roberts court are assaulting American democracy and civil rights by ruling against every real working person in favor of the 1%ers & corporations. A republican vote is a vote against 99% of America

 • The left has ceded too much and originalism has become the purview of the RWNJ. The framers did not define 'quid pro quo' corruption as narrowly as the far right justices on this bench have interpreted it.

On that last point, I would make a distinction between we of the Dem base and Dem politicians who have on certain important issues, ceded the interpretation of the constitution to the RWNJ's. Gun safety.
Big money (NRA/ALEC et al.) and a cooperative MSM sure has given voice to the far right on this and too many Dems backed off on Gun safety measures fearing a primary challenge.  80% populist at one point recently were in favor yet - no progress

And then there is this:

  The John Roberts Project (if you hit a firewall try this route)  by Jefferey Toobin:  

If you think that the Supreme Court’s desision in McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission was bad, just wait: worse may be on the way.
So why is the case important? Because the language of Chief Justice John Roberts’s opinion suggests that the Court remains committed to the project announced most prominently in the Citizens United case, four years ago: the deregulation of American political campaigns.
And Bill Maher did pretty well on this too - imo

Thanks for stopping by :)


You must enter an Intro for your Diary Entry between 300 and 1150 characters long (that's approximately 50-175 words without any html or formatting markup).

P.S. this is posting out early as kind of a time experiment I've been meaning to try, so I won't be around 'til a bit later and promise to read up on any comments. Hope that's cool

Extended (Optional)

Your Email has been sent.