So much for being the leader of the “free” world. The Supreme Court completely eviscerated our democracy today.

Or, put another way

US ends political campaign spending limits

And considering the fact that net neutrality is highly likely go the way of the dodo, I sincerely doubt I’ll be able to acquire Al Jazeera on youtube if I’m not rich enough to afford the extra cash, don’t you think?

Or, in short…U.S. Supreme Court Makes Corporations Supreme, People Mere Monkeys

At the root of the Court’s attack on popular democracy — and it is an attack, and it will promote if not guarantee rule by unaccountable corporate oligarchy — is the Court’s infamous 1976 Buckley v. Valeo decision that said money equals speech. Left unaddressed in today’s decision — and others — is the absurdity of this formula. When money equals speech, outfits with more money have more speech. And that destroys the very principle of free speech.

Ask yourself this question. If you had to persuade your community about political opinion X, but corporations opposed your view, would you stand a chance knowing that their “political speech” was worth much more than your political speech? The answer is obvious. Mere people have been thrown on the scrap heap. The U.S. Supreme Court is lifting corporations to the top of the evolutionary ladder.MORE

Keith Olbermann goes into the ramifications in his inimitable style :Freedom of Speech has been destroyed.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

And i thought that those cyberpunk novels were fiction. Good god.

Digby says:

From what I gather, there are only a couple of things to be done about this: shareholder empowerment or constitutional amendment, both of which are very, very difficult.

and Campaign Finance: Back to the Era of the Robber Barons?

Take a hypothetical homeland security bill. Many people don’t know that Wal-Mart actively campaigns against tighter screening of cargo containers fearing that increased inspections will slow its supply lines. Yet many experts cite 100 percent screening of containers to be a necessary step in protecting our homeland against a terrorist attack. So what happens when a politician with a strong dedication to security matters but who has been bankrolled by Wal-Mart needs to vote on a bill that includes increased container screening? It’s not hard to imagine him rejecting such legislation to ensure Wal-Mart’s support in his re-election campaign.

This kind of political quid pro quo — trading campaign contributions for votes — is a serious concern in our current political climate. Just think how much worse it will be when corporations are free to spend whatever they like.

But even beyond the quid pro quo concerns is the firm belief, shared by multitudes, that more money in our political system is not the direction we should be headed. Rep. Marcy Kaptur (D-Ohio) told me recently that the pressure on members of Congress to raise money is already worse than it’s ever been — and she’s been in the House for 26 years. Kaptur talked of one congressman who spent 90 percent of his time on the telephone fundraising. The obvious question becomes: How the heck did he get anything done? If the Supreme Court rules the way it’s expected to, situations like this will only get worse.

Those in favor of turning back the restrictions assert that special interests are simply groups of individuals advocating a particular issue or candidate, and that restricting what they can spend in this endeavor is the same as limiting their speech. But this is a specious argument. Rolling back campaign finance regulations would result not only in increased political influence by special interests and politicians spending too much time fundraising, but also in a huge increase in negative political ads, as well as the possibility — if not the probability — of increased corruption, and thus even more cynicism about our political system.MORE

As I think about it more…say goodbye to stopping global warming. In fact, bring it on!!! And there go environmental regulations!! And our food system will be going STRAIGHT to hell. No pass go, do not collect $200. Let us not even begin to think of the effects on the rest of the world. Remember how corporations did nasty things to Latin America with the full backing of the US gov’t? Does anyone think that they will stop now? Bolivia for instance, is already under pressure for its lithium.

And if you want to hate Justice Thomas even more: Justice Thomas, Citizens United and Those Scary Gay People

Plus, get to know The Man who took down Campaign Finance Reform

Christ. There’s a reason why I hated reading dystopian novels. I am not happy with the prospect of the plot of one coming to life before my very eyes.