I find this editorial in the New York Times today absolutely hilarious:
With a single, disastrous 5-to-4 ruling, the Supreme Court has thrust politics back to the robber-baron era of the 19th century. Disingenuously waving the flag of the First Amendment, the court’s conservative majority has paved the way for corporations to use their vast treasuries to overwhelm elections and intimidate elected officials into doing their bidding.Congress must act immediately to limit the damage of this radical decision, which strikes at the heart of democracy.
Pardon my cynicism, but the New York Times doesn't really want to keep corporations from influencing elections. They simply want that influence restricted to the New York Times and other media corporations.
Just as hilarious is the outrage from progressives like Keith Olbermann, who warn that corporations are going to take over the government, and from there, our very lives. They're not really pissed about that last part, they're mad because they thought that power would be reserved for them.
Our government is already for sale, and the more power it takes on to create winners and losers in the market, the more power it grabs to redistribute wealth and control behavior, the more for sale it is going to be. This is not rocket science. In fact, the framers of the Constitution had it pretty well figured out over two hundred years ago. In incremental stages though, we have forgotten the true meaning and value of federalism.
If progressives and the New York Times really cared about the people being sold out by the government, they would join the people they deride as "Tenthers" in trying to limit what the government can claim to sell.
Like I said though, that's not what they are really mad about.