Maybe making a mockery of it will fix it… Citizens United is biting the republicans right back in the goolies.

Chuck sounds quite conflicted. Just give up and laugh.

Chuck seems to be taking this personally.    Too bad.   He needs to grow thicker skin.    

Uh oh. Maynard G. Todd has crossed the line, knocking over a hill of beans in the process.

He just called out the Dems’ source of wisdom and the news: COMEDIANS.

At least he stayed away from Maher, the Dalai Lama of Democrat thought.

The media and the election process needs to 
be mocked, you douche. You wonder what their motives are upchuck? I wonder what yours are every time I hear you ask doucheassy questions or repeat GOP talking points.

Chuckie, the point is that he CAN make a mockery of it

I agree.  The ‘mockery’ is how the candidates have used the system.  The MEDIA won’t point that out so THANK  GOD FOR Stewart/Colbert!

I like Chuck and understand that he loves politics but Stephen is just pointing out that the system is a joke. Go Stephen! This whole pac thing needs to come to an end. I think the gop overplayed its hand when they allowed this to happen. When I say the gop I mean John Roberts and the rest of the gop on the SCOTUS.

Agreed. Now Colbert’s PAC needs to start railing against the media AND the SCOTUS to drive the point even further.

Easy Chuck, just because Colbert is better at making a mockery of journalists doesn’t mean that we the people don’t recognize your achievements in the field. 

I think Chuck’s point is this: he idolizes democracy and wonders should people embrace making these processes look lame and uncool at the price of disenfranchising potential candidates as well as disengaging the public?

The real answer is that, as everyone knows, the system is broken for lots of reasons and if mocking it makes things worse, then fixing the system is the only real solution and your real answer to Colbert.

the point he’s making is how easy it is to make a mockery of it. If the system wasn’t broken, there would be no stewart or colbert because there would be nothing to make a mockery of. 

You cannot make a mockery of a ‘system’ that is already a joke. Colbert is simply illustrating the absurdity by being absurd.

Because the system is a joke. 

Chuck is a hard ass politico, but this campaign for the nomination is damn boring, Colbert actually brings some fun and excitement. He and Jon Stewart have put the Citizens United decision into layman’s terms and have shown what a joke the Supreme Court decision really was.

#DetectiveChuckTodd likes Jonathan Swift,Ambrose Bierce,Mark Twain,Pogo,and Doonesbury but think they go too far with the whole satire thing.

The republicans in this political season has made it possible to be a mockery…I’ve watched every debate, and that is about the only conclusion you can come too, unless you just enjoy watching fools make fun of themselves, each other and the whole processs…Very disappointed, it’s no wonder that no republican with any morals or ethics would get into this mess, this year….

The republicans in this political season has made it possible to be a mockery…I’ve watched every debate, and that is about the only conclusion you can come too, unless you just enjoy watching fools make fun of themselves, each other and the whole processs…Very disappointed, it’s no wonder that no republican with any morals or ethics would get into this mess, this year….

Well Chuck, if you and your brethren weren’t such lazy and narcissistic tabloid writers then Steven Colbert wouldn’t even exist. 

This country has become a griftopia (thanks Matt Taibbi) run by people who are literally above the law and you and your asshat friends want to ask presidential candidates about open marriages. Ron Paul was consistently accurate regarding the impending collapse of 2008 and you want none of him to make room for Sarah Palin. Will any big name reporter cover the fact that Romney has almost the exact same donors as Obama? I mean….the facts are RIGHT F*CKING THERE!!

As bad as the politicians are in America, at least they are driven by their own greed to keep their sorry asses in office. These protozoans that cover them just want to go to the cocktail parties and be told how cool they are while doing as little work as possible. 

Happy Friday!

Steven Colbert has every right to call the system as it is. Free Speech equals money. It is mockery. It’s too bad the major networks don’t.

Couldn’t have been stated any better.

Couldn’t have been stated any better.

So to use Mr. Chuck Todd’s logic from this article

Your a comedian as long as you don’t make fun of the press?

spot on.

bingo.

Todd is a real jerk. His interview with Gabby Giffords prior to her being shot was criminal. He needs to be gone. He is really what makes mega-meda really funny. Not Colbert. He is a fool. And, a 1% backer.

Is that something like Rush Limbaugh, the Albert Einstein of Republican thought.

Citizens United has NOTHING to do with super pacs, no matter what activists tell you.  Last year super pac spending was was 13.5 million in South Carolina, this year it’s actually less, it’s 12 million.

McCain – Feingold(BCRA) is responsable for these super pacs.

The only thing Citizens United did was overturn a provision in McCain – Feingold that prohibited ANY corporation or union from mentioning a candidates name within 30 days before a presidential primary and 60 days before a general election.

This is why the ACLU supported the Supreme Courts decision on Citizens United.

“He is making a mockery of the systerm.”

That’s what political satire is, moron. You went to college?

The system deserves to be mocked Chuck, I know you live and die by that broken and corrupted system and that Chuck Todd is basically a poster boy for everything that is wrong with the MSM and Washington as a whole. What Stephen Colbert is doing is noble, he is showing everyone how completely ridiculous and crooked this process is, and Chuck Todd is defending it to the last. Chuck Todd is and always will be a joke.

Great comment.  If the media were considered more reliable and did a better job of unbiased reporting Stewart and Colbert would not be relevant.  It is the media itself that affords these two their relevance and that is the source of Todd’s discomfort.  

Hell, I hope that Colbert will consider a run in the general election, that would be epic!

I hope this is just a desperate cry for attention on behalf of Chuck Todd

Exactly right. Sadly, many here aren’t the least bit interested in the facts of the matter. This is a big part of why we are where we are.

It is sad.  There’s a population of dopes out there that rely on comedians to do their thinking for them.

That’s like saying all the Second Amendment said was

“A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

Nothing too complicated, right? We can have a well-regulated militia, such as the National Guard, to protect the security of our states.

stop trying to marginalize the adverse effects of Citizens United on political campaigns

nobody is buying it except the Koch brothers (literally)

SCOTUS didn’t make this happen. McCain-Feingold made this happen. And McCain-Feingold passed with plenty of Dem support and not nearly as much GOP support.

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Bipartisan_Campaign_Reform_Act_of_2002

If you must blame the GOP, you’ll have to ignore the facts. Carry on.

You make a mockery of it daily, Chuckieboy Todd, by just being your usual douchey self. You don’t need any help from Colbert.

No free speech is free speech. Money allows one to amplify their speech. You, however, are not required to listen. I’d recommend against it and advise doing your own research.

it’s called entertainment and satire

to marginalize this type of free speech, and the appreciation of it, shows your ignorance of world history

No, it’s absolutely nothing like that, Barry. But, KOCH!!!!!

Dope.

That makes no sense at all, Barry. Criticism is also free speech. Which you’re fine with marginalizing. Weird, huh?

Ummm, I don’t want to marginalize anybody’s right to free speech, which is why I support the Supreme Courts decision on Citizens United.

Wow, just wow.

So Chuck Todd blames the media, last I checked that is what Chuck does.  He’s just pissed because nobody pays attention to him and Comedy Central makes fun of him.

The system is mockery, Colbert is just pointing it out illustratively!

Has Stephen Colbert been making a mockery of ‘The Political System?’

Absolutely!!!

…but it’s considerably less mocking than the current crop of Republican Presidential Candidates!!!

Well, can´t blame Colbert and Stewart for being so much smarter than you Chuck. And oh boy do they get material from the media and the politicians. They don´t even have to make any effort to mock it.

“Making a mockery of the system”  Of course he is. That’s the point!  Duh! 

I think you’re not telling the whole story regarding BCRA. Once this legislation passed the spending it was intended to regulate was simply handed over from national parties to private interest groups of assorted political persuasions. Just to appease your libertarian sensibilities I readily admit that Democrats rely as heavily on these groups as Republicans.

Citizen’s United allows these groups to then use their new found free speech and bottomless pockets to relentlessly bash a candidate immediately proceeding an election. Please let me know if I’m missing something here.Now you can think Colbert is a clown and the people who enjoy him are drooling children, but the fact that he might actually force campaign finance laws into the spotlight is a good thing.

Perhaps if we in the media actually did our jobs of pointing out the insanity in the current process, the lies and distortions rolled out as truth – regardless of party – he might have a point. 

What’s happened is that the last free speech fire wall of satire is the only thing we have left to inform the public. We must give up this notion that there are two sides to every argument. Instead we must point out the facts and let the chips fall where they may.

Colbert and Stewart are only able to make a mockery of the GOP because it has become a joke. Chuck should have the guts to say “what so and so just said about such and such is in fact not true” and then cite the source of the distortion and the source of the accurate information. 

“Making a mockery of the system”   Of course he is. That is the point Chuck. Duh. 
Oh, and as a Brit,thank you for giving us , in the old country so much fun! Keep it up. Please. 

It has all to do with SuperPac´s. SuperPACs would´t exist without Citizen United and the following speechnoworg case. There were no SuperPac´s prior to the ruling. 

You have forgotten to mention the SCOTUS allowed independent expenditures.

Part of me agrees with Todd. 

But it seems to me that the candidates are making a mockery of the system as well.  In so many ways.

Pols have been making a mockery of government for so long – how is it that this is any different.  At least with Colbert – we – laugh.

ok ok ok…. McCain – Feingold(BCRA) is biting the republicans back in the goolies…

is that better?

Chuck, I do not watch Stephen Colbert, but I do listen (less and less) to the men and women on TV who parade themselves as journalists-they are funny.  In addition, the current crop of candidates are jokes for any person who enjoys a good laugh.  Do not blame the current state of affairs on a man who provides good comedy.

“Your mom went to college.”

Chuck Todd is the Brian Kilmeade of MSNBC. He and his ilk make a mockery of the process on a daily basis.

colbert and stewart are the only media people being truthful about their feelings. the rest are either left or right wing spin! or like todd in the interest of showing their “ubiased” nature aren’t being truthful with the viewers and always seem to be holding back. the other side of the coin are those media people who are obviously biased and continually subtely spin all issues. as a viewer it’s hard to hear the truth sometimes, or to see the value in this type of punditry! at least we know going in that faux and msnbc are biased! the same can be said for colbert and stewart– we know they are biased and at least apply humor to it! they’re always the highlight of my tv viewing! todd takes himself too seriously!

Citizen’s United allows these groups to then use their new found free
speech and bottomless pockets to relentlessly bash a candidate
immediately proceeding an election.

So, how is this relevant 10 months before an election? And do you think that dictating when speech can be infringed upon comports with the First Amendment?

No. SuperPACs wouldn’t exist without McCain-Feingold. But if you want to tie them to a court ruling, it’s SpeechNow.org v. Federal Election Commission, not Citizen’s United.

The more money you have (i.e. billionaires, corporations and unions) the more free speech you can have… yup, I’m sure the founding fathers had this exactly in mind.

You don’t think it’s a problem that in our political process, those with more money are able to amplify their speech to the point where they drown out the speech of the poor? Why does someone with more money get to have a louder voice in our political process? That is the exact opposite of equality.

I don’t know what it is but he is completely off base on this one.

It would be if it were a GOP bill. It isn’t.

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Bipartisan_Campaign_Reform_Act_of_2002

Also, Colbert would have to be making an actual impact, as opposed to cheapening an already cheap process. He isn’t.

This is from the guy who begged Donlad Trump come one his show. And try to lie about it and say Trump asked him to come. When it was the other way around. Trump has done the same things that Chuck is blasting Stephen for.   So Chuck has no right to say anything. And I think he is part of why MSNBC can’t beat Fox,

im_loving_it, you basically have it right.  BCRA was intended to regulate campaign ads, and like most legislation, the unintended consequences wound up worse than what it was originally intended to fix. 

This is how we wound up with the explosion of 527′s like Swiftboaters for Truth.

I’m sure you understand why the Citizens United case was important for speech.  The chilling effect that that provision of BCRA would have over speech, would be similar to what SOPA would have over the internet.  Even books could be subject to censorship by the FEC if left in place.

SuperPacs existed a plenty before Citizens United.  I just gave you a free fact, FreeCommonSense.

Colbert is doing almost exactly what Will Rogers did in 1928, using his
fame as a satirist and movie star to run for president, pointing out
the absurdities of the campaign process. Somehow the country survived People today are probably no more or less
cynical than they were then and I don’t think Colbert or Stewart are going to make that worse. Are they biased -sure, but if the right doesn’t like that they’re free to find their own comedians and do the same thing. This type of satire is not new in our country, people like Rogers and Ambrose Bierce and Mark Twain are famous in our history for it.

Dear Chuck, what you and all the rest of the cable heads (sans CSPAN) do IS A JOKE DESERVING OF MOCKERY.

Colbert and Stewart are indeed marginalizing the media and the political players as they should! Good comedy is always anti-establishment to some degree, just as political cartoons have been for over a century.

I think Chuck’s just jealous because both John and Stephen know how to ask essential follow up questions. Maybe journalists could take note of that and do it in a non-comedic venue.

10 months goes by quickly. I think it is important Americans have an understanding of the impending flood of drivel and half-truths they’re going to get. Isn’t your nihilist side a little excited to see how amazingly negative this general election is going to be?

Free speech is a protected right of citizens. I don’t think corporations are citizens. Isn’t forcing warning labels on products an infringement of a company’s free speech?

Agreed. That’s the drawback to liberal do-gooder stuff is it can so quickly turn into Big Brother Knows Best. Nevertheless, I feel like legislation, when done effectively and with constituents best interests in mind, can actually work.

I suppose I’m a Leslie Knope to your Ron Swanson.

Todd was ‘offended’. What pious hand-wringing. Colbert is a modern-day combination of Twain, Swift, Chaplin, Groucho and Roy Rogers.

Not my problem, you can´t comprehend what speechnoworg case means.

Nonsense. 

First, if you make bald assertions about spending comparisons, then, Linky Please.

Second, the idea is of PACs is bad enough – so-called non-coordinating actually ridiculously easy coordination of messages between candidate & PAC plus reducing if not eliminating the normal price a candidate pays and SHOULD pay for attack ads especially misleading attacks – but the idea behind SuperPACs is in direct response to the huge truck lanes Citizens United opened up to allow a few dozen megalomaniacally meddling billionaire hedge funder operators & fossil fuel exploiters to hide even their own tracks in gaming the system.

Third, blaming McCain-Feingold for SuperPACs & other campaign financing abuses is like blaming the victim of a rape for wearing a dress.

Fourth, the ACLU argued a line about failure of Congress to follow the Constitution in imposing limitations on the 1st Amendment, but it most definitely did NOT argue that Congress lacks properly exercised authority in limiting campaign expenditures in the public interest. That was the REAL shocker in CU: the SCOTUS bare majority going out of its way to strip Congressional authority & force We the People to the most difficult, onerous, time-consuming & unlikely of Constitutional resorts in order to ensure free & democratic elections, & trashing an entire line of well-established precedent on Congress’ authority in this area. Indeed, if anyone in the House chamber was the most expert on that area of the law, it was most certainly the President, who concentrated a decade of his time teaching at U of Chicago Law on precisely this point. 

But the main flaw in your post is the Big Lie in the implication that somehow despite an ocean of evidence that low information voters are deeply vulnerable to being manipulated by political ads, they aren’t. Go tell that one to Frank Luntz; the entire business plan of the Republican party is founded on the truth to the exact opposite.  

Geeejus chuck!  Your industry and You are part of the problem whether or not you believe the words you utter! Colbert is Only bringing the Public into the conversation-Politicians, Corps, The Greedy Wealthy and MSM have collectively and so completely ALREADY Destroyed “The System” and  “They” have “Mocked” the electorate/public for Decades-you appear to try and blame the victims here.

Colbert simply offers a nice hot cuppa for those who are just waking up to the fact and reality that the system is/has been broken and has been since Before You and Colbert were Born!
Your ”word stew” is—well, just MSM crap! Grap a cuppa, why don’cha? Learn something real and understand the facade of “mockery” is exposed.

I’d add Will Rogers, check out his 1928 presidential campaign section on Wikipedia

10 months goes by in 10 months. I agree that people need to be critical. We get the government we deserve and we have the one we’ve got because we don’t pay attention.

Speech is speech. The First Amendment does not give anyone a right, it restrains the government from infringing on free speech.

Yes on the warning labels, though that’s one of many unconstitutional things made constitutional by the utter perversion of the Commerce Clause. Wickard v. Filburn is a far greater threat to liberty than Citizens United will ever dream of being.

False, they didn´t and couldn´t.

Only after the two mentioned rulings PAC´s could be formed and be registered as Independent-expenditure-only political committee.

That´s what the legal term for a SuperPac is.

FYI, SpeechNow didn´t want to register as PAC, but was forced by the court to do so.

You can´t name a single SuperPac before the rulings since the legal definition of what is called a SuperPac is based and result of both rulings.

You gave a me free display of your lack of knowledge or misunderstanding on the subject.

This is actually quite common in increasingly authoritarian & oppressive societies, where only artists & entertainers have the courage & forum to point out the truth. It happened repeatedly through the former Iron Curtain countries as Soviet Russia lost its hold over its satellites. The “sad” part lies not in any “population of dopes” – it lies in the establishment forcing this situation. It’s not surprising in the least that the “most trusted person in news” is Jon Stewart, because he’s among those actually trying to tell truths. And in this failure of our msm, I’m not at all sure Fuppet News is the worst offender, because it’s so easy to see Roger Ailes’ manipulations: to me the worst offenders are in the other msm news orgs that purport to stand as the alternative to the FNC fairy tale, particularly CNN with its phony hesaidshesaid conceit. According to recent Pew Foundation polling, the most trusted news outlet OTHER than the Comedy Central line-up is PBS – but as much as I like Jim Lehrer’s flat, factual delivery, every week he gives a platform to one of the most egregious Republican tools in media, David Brooks. Indeed, every one of the so-called serious news outlets  does this, including even msnbc with Morning Goe. 

The doofuses are those who uncritiquely rely on so-called serious news & news commentary for their opinions, that is, those who outsource their thinking. 

Third, blaming McCain-Feingold for SuperPACs & other campaign financing abuses is like blaming the victim of a rape for wearing a dress.

How is a federal law like a rape victim?

But the main flaw in your post is the Big Lie in the implication that somehow despite an ocean of evidence that low information voters are deeply vulnerable to being manipulated by political ads, they aren’t.

I don’t see anyone making that argument. The argument is that the fact that stupid people vote is not reason enough to discard the First Amendment.

Try reading the ACLU’s amicus brief if you care to understand the case:

The ACLU has consistently taken the position that section 203 is
facially unconstitutional under the First Amendment because it permits
the suppression of core political speech, and our amicus brief takes
that position again.

http://www.aclu.org/free-speech/citizens-united-v-federal-election-commission

If not, you may continue using your silly buzzwords.

the system doesn’t need any help in that direction-it has already made a mockery of itself which
Stephen is simply satirizing-a little jealousy there Todd?  Colbert and Stewart make the pols and
the pundits look as ridiculous and arrogant as indeed they are at which they then take umbrage-
thank God for these two brilliant intellectually gifted comedians who keep the process in
perspecitive.

The System is making a mockery of the System.

…Colbert is just pointing that out.

But…bu..bu…the system IS a mockery.

I watch his show and it’s the people who are supporting him that are making a mockery of the process. It seems most of his and Jon Stewart’s viewers don’t have respect or knowledge of the country or the process. And why should they? Every Republican is portrayed as stupid (unless they already have a record and it’s too late to make it stick) or they’re racist or greedy.(i.e. Sarah Palin was not qualified for vice-president, yet Joe Biden is just funny when he misspeaks) Government is caring when they confiscate money and give it away (the healthcare bill could have been done in two pages, what’s in the other 2000?) J.F.K. is famous for saying “ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country” yet today’s democrats just want you to ask what they can give you to buy your vote, Yet, I never see anybody on tv ask that

F. Chuck, good call!

This is part of the Saul Alinsky (Obama taught a course on Saul Alinsky’s Marxist strategies, and has been attempting to impose them for the past three years) methods of undermining a democracy.

Discredit Family, Religion and traditional establishments of authority…then the overbearing Democratic Central Government.

This is the system making its own failings available for mockery.  Chuck Todd is a humorless idiot with the talent god gave my Nikes.
What is it that the Right wingers just don’t get about satire?  They live it, just look at Fox “news”. 

More like the Steve Douchey of MSNBC….but I agree with your sentiment.  What a humorless hack.

Hear, hear!  Good to see another Brit up here!

If Chuck’s going to act this uptight, he should be going by “Charles.” 

Chuck “Media Hack” Todd knows that the system is a MOCKERY. And it’s media buffoons like him who treat sociopathic hucksters like Trump as SERIOUS candidates. And yet he’s outraged. Hilarious!

But at least Todd will be called out by Colbert and Stewart for his hypocrisy.

Isnt McCain a republican?  

Thank the Lord we have Chuck Todd to look out for the corporate sponsored parties and protect them from marginalization and mockery!  The system is dead, we are all whistling past the graveyard.

Chuck Todd, whom I usually respect, clearly does not get it, nor does he get the degree of skepticism that exists with voters of all parties.  The system is virally rotten to the core-and getting worse every year, and his assertion that Colbert and Stewart have some vested interest in their own political aspirations is, frankly, a tone-deaf accusation.

Chuck Todd is correct to the extent that Colbert and Stewart should stop playing dumb about their political influence. The “Hey, I’m a just comedian” card that Stewart always plays is disingenuous. Yes, he is a comedian (and a very good one) but the role he plays in the American political discourse is significant. And he knows it. He won’t own up to it, but he knows it.

McCain Feingold
With republicans in the majority in 2002 ( Speaker Hastert) the bill  passed the House 240 -189 and passed the Democratic party controlled senate 60/40This bill was supported by both parties and sponsored by members of both parties as well.

No, they didnt.
http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/daily-ticker/super-pacs-bird-plane-well-complicated-205544829.html 

RINO is the term usually used for McCain. Is Feingold a Republican?

If you click on that Sourcewatch link, you can see the vote breakdown by party.

No, you and I can have as much free speech as rich people. Our ability to broadcast it is more limited, but you still have just as much freedom to speak as anyone else.

The freedom to speak is not a right to be heard.

I take pride in sending hate (half-serious) in Chuck Todd’s way but I will hand it to him…

This is a perfectly FAIR assessment from a reporter without an agenda.

Hey Chuck, get a life.  Repblican politicians and voters have already made a mockery of the system.  Go get a real story.

Nothing you said is sane – it’s like cut and paste from the Newt/Rush Handbook.

If you think it’s a problem there’s a very simple solution: Turn off your TV.

Is it a problem that big corporations have the ability to widely advertise their products and services that smaller competitors don’t? Is it a problem that Stephen Colbert has a TV platform that you and I don’t have? Is that equal?

Really? Explain what the DOJ was trying to do here: Supreme Court delivers a knockout punch to the White House

I broke down the vote earlier in another  post.  This bill supported by McCain a republican (no matter what moniker you give still an elected Republican) and Feingold a Democrat..It was called the  BI PARTISAN Campaign Reform Act  So this bill passed the Democratic controlled senate (60-40) and the Republican controlled house 240/189.  Still passed. 
So no- silly- Feingold not a republican, McCain- republican.  Hope this helps you figure it out. 

Chuck Todd is a hack, a perfect example of what is wrong with TV journalism. To see him complaining about anybody having any negative influence on our system is the pot calling the kettle black.

Chuck is clearly taking this personally, getting defensive of the system he “idolizes”. Well, idolizing something is exactly how one goes about ignoring its flaws, allowing it to become a joke, and condemning its critics. What Chuck is ignoring here is how much the Main Stream Media fell down on the job of reporting on the system getting dismantled into the joke that it has become because they were too busy idolizing it (and, much like ex-congressmen getting jobs as lobbyists, profitting from it). We’re at the point where the only people most Americans trust to cover the story is those who revolt against idolizing so much that they make a mockery of it. I’ll take whatever works to get the job done.

I swear to God, a journalist admitting he “idolizes” that which he is supposed to be reporting on… wow. No wonder the system is broken!

Making a mockery of the political process? The process is a mockery and a complete distortion of politics already.  Which of these Republican candidates strike anyone as serious? They have all been caricatures developed by focus group mentality, suckled by the likes of the Chuck Todds of the world. Colbert is making a mockery of the mockery. . . Find an honest job Chuckie. . .

Don’t confuse them with facts.

Chuck Todd NEVER treated Trump as a SERIOUS candidate.

I dont agree with about anything Chuck Todd just said. America needs people like Colbert and Stewart to show how ridiculous our media and our politicians are. Without them who is going to do it. Yes they make fun of the media because they are comedians on COMEDY CENTRAL, the media are so called NEWS people that dont do their job all the time. Chuck Todd agrees the system is a mess but now when Colbert is showing exactly how messed up it is Chuck questions it. You cant have it both ways, you cant say the system is broken and when someone is showing how broken it is you say he is marginalizing republicans. The so called “NEWS” media just cant handle how Colbert and Stewart make them look like idiots and then want to say now they are part of it. Satire is satire for a reason.

Stewart mocks the media for it’s failures to inform, which I don’t have a problem with. But then he also fails to inform, usually giving only his liberal slant, which makes him just as guilty as the people he ridicules, or even more so in my opinion, because he is influencing his audience to dislike the people he attacks, which the media doesn’t do.

The Supreme Court made a mockery of elections. Jefferson would be appalled about what it going on.

Thanks for the link Chicagonurse.  Center for Public Integrity, where the guest was from, is a left wing think tank funded by George Soros.  That doesn’t mean that I automatically discount what he said but…

He noted a series of lower court decisions.  Like the speechnow.org case Pablo mentioned above.

Citizens United explicitly dealt with speech.

If you want to blame a law for the rise of the pacs/superpacs, it’s McCain-Feingold.

What exactly is your point Pablo?

If I shut off my TV, I’m disconnecting myself from information.  Citizens need to be able to easily access information about elected officials so they can make an informed decision.

People have a problem with the information that is being pushed by big money, because these people want to drive large numbers of voters in the direction they want, using their money.

Team A, as one entity, could put forth $95 million dollars on ONE issue, and broadcast to millions.  But what if the people under the legislation that team A pushed for doesn’t want it and has a viable alternative?  Is your answer for them to band together, start a new entity of their own, and open their pockets fully to MAYBE get something through but yet exhaust their resources just to see Team A put $50 million into a new version the next month?

It’s broken.  The evolution of how people interact, exchange ideas and information, and view information has made it clear that money can override the will of the people with ease.

The problem isn’t as simple as turning off a television. The money is everywhere: billboards, radios, newspapers, tvs, the internet, through robocalls, people on the street working for campaigns. It’s a machine, and it’s impossible to avoid. It’s ESPECIALLY impossible to avoid if you’re simply being a good citizen and trying to educate yourself on the issues.

Advertising, though, isn’t the real problem with the money. It’s the money that goes to the campaigns for that advertising. That money is coming from massive donors. Corporations. Individuals. Unions. And all of these people who donate millions or billions are going to expect to see something for the money they’re handing over. The money controls the policy. The money buys our politicians. All of them. Not left or right. All of them.

If I were to call Romney’s campaign right now and ask to speak to him, even if I were to call daily, I’d never have a shot. If the CEO of Apple called Romney’s campaign (or the White House), they’d be on the phone immediately, looking for money for their campaigns. That kind of money grants access that the poor don’t have, and it grants power that the poor can never have.

That’s a plutocracy.

I kind of agree with him on the Stewart and Colbert accountability point but covering Colbert is not akin to marginalizing the candidates 

get a life chuck; you must be a republican; they never laugh at themselves………i think the bozos running for office and the koch brothers are making a mockery of the system,; jon and steven  are comedians or hadnt you noticed. but they add more to the political discourse than a lot of talking head out there;  you included.  lighten up or vote for the democrats.

i hate net fan boys who say “spot on”

and btw  - I worked with Chuck on the 92 Harkin Presidential campaign.  Hes a lefty Dem.

 I worked with Chuck on the 92 Harkin Presidential campaign.  Hes a lefty Dem.

can you read?

chuck wasnt talking about colbert mocking campaign financing – hes talking about colbert mocking repubs in a repub primary (see his “mitt the ripper” campaign ad now airing in SC)

Two Words for Mr. Todd….Donald Trump!

I guess Todd doesn’t get comedy. If anything, I think his relentlessly dull reporting does more to hurt the process trhan anything else. I think Todd is upset because he hasn’t been on either show.How is 30 minutes of, sometimes entertaining, tv marginalzing the Republican party?

And doesn’t he start out by saying “The critcism isn’t of him (Colbert).” before he lauches into thhis long harangue about Colbert marginalizing Republicans? Todd is a ass.

If the Republicans can be so “marginalized” by Colbert, maybe they’re a bunch of clowns themselves.

Tood just sounds like another Republican, with no sense of humor.

Chuck, I knew Tim Russert, and you’re no Tim Russert.

How can Colbert “marginalize” a party that seriously considered Donald Trump and Herman Cain as Presidential candidates? Sounds like Chuck is biting a little too hard on the “all sides are equal” meme that has allowed GOP lies, falsehoods and smears to make their way into mainstream reporting with little to no fact checking or challenges.

Chuck, walk outside the tent for a moment, don’t you realize your in the middle of a circus.  

Chuck Todd has been making a mockery of journalism for years. Screw him and his plastic looking hair.

McCain-Feingold is what got overturned by Citizen’s United.

1.  Did Mr. Todd question the motives of Cain / Trump when throwing their beanies (rugs) into the political arena?

2.  If EVER there was a system that deserved, earned and BEGGED for mocking…

3. Any effort to ‘marginalize’ this crop of GOP candidates simply demonstrates a keen grasp of the obvious on Colbert’s part; and

4.  Should Mr. Todd’s insecurities about how he’s doing his job really be Colbert’s problem?

I meant Will.

Hey Todd! You can’t have it both ways:

Either do your job and cover the stories that Colbert and Stewart have been covering in your stead (ie, the mockery our election system has become with Citizens United) or quit complaining about what Colbert and Stewart are doing. That’s their motive…. They’re trying to wake-up the media and other assorted blind persons to what’s happened to this country…A corporation is a person?

Like my Grandpa from Texas said: “Only when we get one of them corporations on Death Row…”

No one has done more to “marginalize” the effectiveness of the media’s responsibility to call bullcrap on politicians who lie than corporate apologist and shill extraordinaire Chuck Todd.

He’s just sore because Colbert is appreciated and loved and he’s only well paid and regarded as a necessary evil.

Todd fails to realize that you can’t make a mockery of something that’s already a joke to begin with.

“it feels as if he’s trying to influence it with his own agenda”

That’s a good one.
Do you and NBC have an agenda Chuck?

hey chuck before you run your month. ask tucker carlson and rick sanchez about what happens when you run your month on jon stewart and stephen colbert. Didn’t he get them fired ?

No.

Stephen didn’t but jon did. On Crossfire Stewart was on the show. him and Tucker got into it and cnn fired Tucker right after that. and let’s not forget Ricks comment about saying jon was a racist and jews run the media. After that rick got on Jon’s hit list and got canned.  And the way MSNBC has been latly. It would not surprase me to see Chuck appolzige and go on supenion over this.

He did not get anyone fired.

Colbert is using sarcasm to show the absurdity of how the system works. Chuck Todd is taking it too seriously.  John Stewart begged the commentators years ago to shape up, in the old Cross Fire show. 

Here is a good one. What kind of “system” is set up in such a strange manner that someone like Colbert could make fun of it, SO EASILY? Its not his job to FIX it, its ours and Washington’s. I’m happy Colbert is doing this especially at a time when one candidate’s PAC is under scrutiny by another candidate. ITS HILARIOUS because Colbert is joking, but his JOKE looks so much like the real thing, that it IS A JOKE!

Chuck Todd is right! People like Stewart and Colbert are killing America. They should be thrown on the trash heap of history with others of their ilk like Mark Twain and Will Rogers. We all know how Mark Twain and Will Rogers betrayed America and nearly destroyed all honest, upright and faithful media people.

You tell them Todd. Get out there and burn a few Mark Twain books and a knock down a few of those  Will Rogers statues and make America safe for honest media people and Republicans again!

Way to go F Chuck Todd.  I appreciate you calling a spade a spade

Comedians ACTING like media members don’t to account for their humor or anything else.  What, they can’t be as funny as they want to be?  Is there some statute of limitations on idiocy, hypocrisy, lying, and obfuscating by the politicians and media?  Maybe if the media and politicians themselves were a little more accountable?!?!

Wow!! It’s obvious you never spent two minutes watching Faux News if you say that about Stewart.  LOL!!

The mockery started in 2008 the second Palin was foisted upon the world.  Since then, comedians have simply needed to quote accurately the republicans for all the comedy they could ever need.  The best was when Newty said that to quote his critique of the Ryan plan would be a lie.  WTF?!?!  Nobody is creative enough to think that up as comedy.  It is just too preposterous.  Last night, when Newty attacked John King, that was another example.  Newty, the man that had the gaul to ask Bill Clinton about a blow job, and he won’t answer a valid question about what he wanted to do with his ex-wife?  OMG, that is TOO funny!!!

Ummmmm…  do you belong to The Church of Confusion?  Dude, you can’t string together a cogent thought.

So back and re-listen to Faux News to make sure and get the smack right.

Chuck, if you did your JOB, Colbert would not be needed.  A bit late to be crying about it now. 

Huh?  What is it with you teabaggers?  Do you all just type the random dumb thoughts that are floating in your skulls at any given time?

The system should be mocked – the campaign finance process and Citizens United are a joke.  You may not like what Colbert is doing, but it goes to show how flawed the process is.  R don’t like it when the joke’s on them.  So STFU.

LMAO!!  Golly, you should write for The Onion.  You mean to say, because they refuse to think in the same far-right, un-intellectual, whatever-Faux-News-says-I-repeat kind of of way you have that they don’t have respect or knowledge of the system?  They knew enough to kick the a$$ of your candidate in 2008, and they’ll do it again in 2012.

Colbert and Stewart state the obvious and the media should back them up about what is going on in our so called Republic/democracy. It’s a joke and the joke is on us until we get involved, as is the people joining in Occupy WS. These nitwits running for office are not representative of America, but are the 1%. At least Obama stands up to them, as in the oil companies, and when elected I look for him to act more boldly. Problem here is we need more Democrats in the Congress. FDR had a majority and was able to regulate the banks with Glass Steagall.

Stephen
Colbert is a comedian, and the other Republican candidates are bad jokes. Pat
Paulsen and Andy Kaufman tore down the gates, opened the door, and Colbert has
charged through the portal!

Stewart hates it when you guys compare him to a news channel!!

Colbert is mocking republicans? OMG, when did this start happening???

Chuck Todd said Colbert maybe marginalizing the Republican candidates when that’s the candidates’ job.

Exactly.  They’re doing a fine job marginalizing themselves even without Colbert’s help.

The system is a joke.

The way to fix the whole campaign finance nonsense is straightforward:

1) Unlimited individual contributions, provided they are fully disclosed.

2) No corporate or PAC contributions.

3) Campaigns must disclose their donors weekly, not quarterly.

Come on, you guys. He “idolizes” Congress. He thinks the fighting between Democrats and Republicans is good.

He’s an idiot.

House vote: Dem: 198-12 in favor, GOP: 41-176 opposed, Ind: 1-1

Senate vote: Dem: 48-2 in favor, GOP: 11-38 opposed, Ind: 1-0 in favor

Yes, there was GOP support, but there was far more GOP opposition.

Vote breakdown by party, genius. The things you can learn when you click the damn link!

House vote: Dem: 198-12 in favor, GOP: 41-176 opposed, Ind: 1-1

Senate vote: Dem: 48-2 in favor, GOP: 11-38 opposed, Ind: 1-0 in favor

Gop more than 4-2 against in the House and 3-1 against in the Senate. That is a Dem bill, not a GOP bill.

Part of it. Not all of it. What it overturned was the restriction on ads close to the election.

If I shut off my TV, I’m disconnecting myself from information.
 Citizens need to be able to easily access information about elected
officials so they can make an informed decision.

Are you getting quality information from campaign ads?

You’re aware of the limits on donations to campaigns, aren’t you?

http://www.fec.gov/pages/brochures/contriblimits.shtml

There are always going to be people more influential than other people. That’s a fact of life and I have no interesting in living under a government that purports to fix that fact of human nature.

You know why the rich guy gets the candidate on the phone?  He’s got rich friends too.

Chuck Todd is a right winger? That’s interesting.

Do yourself a favor and don’t join a conversation you’re not capable of following.

Nice { ;<)

http://tinyurl.com/7lvzlf3

So there was GOP support and a Republican co sponsored the bill?  Thinking its a little hard to blame this bill solely on Democrats.

A senior federal prosecutor in Arizona is asserting his Fifth Amendment rights and refusing to testify before a House committee next week in its ongoing probe of Operation Fast and Furious.

Patrick J. Cunningham, chief of the Criminal Division of the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Arizona, informed the House Oversight Committee through his lawyer Thursday that he will invoke his right against self-incrimination, Fox News reported.

He was ordered Wednesday to appear by committee chair Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), who’s been heading up the investigation into the botched program. Under Fast and Furious, weapons sold to Mexican drug cartels were not tracked, resulting in the deaths of hundreds, including a U.S. Border Patrol agent.

“I am writing to advise you that my client is going to assert his constitutional privilege not to be compelled to be a witness against himself,” Cunningham’s attorney wrote in a letter to the committee. “My client is, in fact, innocent, but he has been ensnared by the unfortunate circumstances in which he now stands between two branches of government. I will therefore be instructing him to assert his constitutional privilege.”.

News Tommy won’t print.

I don’t think I was talking to you. 

spot on.

This is a good question, and I am glad to get some alternative views on Citizens’ United here in a mediaite forum from people I normally dismiss as conservative trolls of all people . . .

I do want to regulate campaign financing and lobbying. What former Democrat Senator Chris Dodd said about Hollywood not giving money to Obama and the Democrats unless SOPA and PIPA were supported, as another recent example, was disgusting http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/01/19/exclusive-hollywood-lobbyist-threatens-to-cut-off-obama-2012-money-over-anti/

While we may find it difficult to regulate lobbyists and their activities, though, we can regulate our Senators and Congress people. We can pass laws forcing them to be transparent about all meetings and donations. We can even prohibit them from meeting lobbyists except on CSPAN if we want. They are the peoples’ employees after all.

However, I cannot think of any way to regulate outside spending on political ads. Freedom of Speech just blows away any strategy or tactic I can imagine. If the Koch Brothers want to spend 100 million dollars for ads showing their art collection: no problem. The same money advocating their products: again, no problem. Why would we be able to stop them from telling us their political views? The only people we can regulate here would be those wanting to become our employees, and this is just what the non-collusion clauses regulating the Super PACs are doing.

Of course it looks bad to the electorate when Romney stands up like some buffoon and says he can’t tell those running the Super PAC supporting him to stop some ads. It looks dodgy; he looks dodgy. The electorate doesn’t support him. Score one for democracy.

If my views on this are evolving correctly, then Citizens’ United is not the crux of the issue; it is simply exposing the deeper problem. The problem is that we citizens are fickle and easily moved by drama on TV (and on radio and online). This is an old criticism from the right regarding the indoctrination of the left into near-Communism. It is also what Fox and Rush both get rich off of — entertainment (in collusion with some Republican leaders) masquerading as news and information. We the people are suckers for a well-crafted show. If we can’t find some way around this, then those with the most money (or with the biggest grassroots movement and talent) will be able to sway us every single time.

I was shocked a few years back when one of my Japanese students told me that her cosmetics company had very competitive products in the market but that they were sure to have dramatically lower sales this year, all year long, all because their advertisement selection had missed some critical deadlines. That meant to me the ads were far more important than the quality of the products they were selling. This same dynamic is afflicting American democracy in the age of mass media.  Image and exposure is king; substance is the pauper.

The only out for me is huge changes in personal decision making brought on by education and encouraged critical, even sceptical reception of all ads. Can anyone imagine that? We could do that, maybe, but it is a long range strategy that would be fought tooth and nail by current media powerhouses.

It is a demoralizing picture.

Makes sense..  Silly me.             wow.

Like most people, the only reason I tune into The Daily Rundown is to hear what the soup of the day is.

Ohhh…  you posted a link to Faux News!!  How very non-creative of you.  As far as the content of the link, I have two words: Ha! Ha! 

You think I give a crap about some dustup over some churchy organization?  It doesn’t say anything other than the current SCOTUS digs on churchy people, and the administration disagrees.  Nothing new here.

And Fox is news?  Hardee-har-har!

It’s only Stephen Colbert home state I think that he did this back in 08 as well. It isn’t serious it is entertaining to hear about.

Todd are you kiddin? The republicans have made this campaign out of a big fat JOKE!! The world is looking at America and laughing their asses off. We are approving, racist, cheaters, liars, and crooks to run for president of the United States!! Our people have died to get people like this out of other countries elections and here we are stepping on their memories. America was the country every country wanted to be like but now they laugh and look at us like we are jokes! Terrorist won’t have to kill us, we are killing ourselves with the worse enemy ever “HATE”!

Please, a system as screwed up as this deserves to be mocked. Any society that says “Corporations” are people is beyond hope. That tells you just how ludicrous this system is. There is a theory in law called “the reasonable man” theory. Nothing about the Supreme Court declaring Corporations as people is reasonable. It’s completely assinine and makes a mockery of our judicial system.

Colbert ran in SC in 2008 too. It’s a part of his show and Chuck Todd should lighten up and seek some help for this evident lack of sense of humor. I thought he was a bit more intelligent than this. Or he’s too much into McCarthy with this “What’s his [Colbert's] agenda?!” On any case very disappointing.

I think this is a case of competence envy: Colbert is better at his job (political satirist) than Todd is at his (political journalist).

Colbert is also an entertainment entrepreneur, while Todd is a wage slave. Naturally, Colbert has much broader scope to operate within.

In large measure, it comes down to career choices and how you manufacture your own success.

Not a big fan of Colbert raising awareness on how SuperPACs work. We need to preserve trade secrets.

It is not Colbert (Bless him) who is making a mockery of the system. It was SCOTUS in their Citizens United decision that has made a mockery of the system. Colbert and Stewart have been no less than masterful in showing how this is the worst Supreme Court decision since Dred Scott.

What a joke !  A  BIG  F’n  JOKE!!  S.C.

You Don’t hold Congress in D.C. Accountable for their lies and nasty back door deals, BUT  ooooh……were so angry at them and want them to change! ! more death of thousands of young kids from war that was motivated by congress and greed.

So what do you do S.C.?  You sit and clap for the same nasty devious insiders(Newt)(Mitt)(Rick) and vote for them. the same kind of Garbage that is already in the Congress!  see, to congress it does not matter who you vote for dem or repub, so long as you don’t vote for someone who wont play their game! It’s like a big welcome home party for congress.

Don’t see clearly? That if congress and media are pulling for mit-newt-rick and black balling Ron Paul there is be something wrong?

It’s not Ron Paul’s so called radical views as congress & media would have you believe, but the mere fact that he wont play their Game!! his game means change!

…Just look at our pathetic Government!

(Hilliary Clinton $35million) (Mitt Romney $12million ) (John Kerry $30 million) (Newt Gingrich $14million) (B. Obama $12 million)(Rick Santorum $5million) (Nancy Pelosi $65million) and the list goes on and on just from 2002 – 2010! Profits in U.S. from companies that build weapons!

To make matters worse our Gov is owned by the corporations (Bain, Goldmen Sacks, Boeing, Monsanto, Lockheed, Boeing) to buy the media off to paint a picture of our congress as humanitarian’s! What a joke! but Oh so TRUE!

One Man was not here courting you, he was in D.C. fighting for us. it was Ron Paul.

Newt will win ,…Because this is what Americans want!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=CWKTOCP45zY#!

Pablo

me thinks yee know what I dost meant

Citizen’s United is the biggest threat to our American democracy since the McCarthy trials.

but i give you points for standing up for what you’re paid to believe in.

what are going off the rails about this time, Pablo?

left you speechless didn’t I?

I guess I just violated your rights under Citizens United…now go have a 3rd trimester abortion under Roe v Wade and leave me alone

the Soros reference reveals you as a fraud, Turk281

but I admit you’re one of the better spreaders of misinformation and Koch propaganda that I’ve come across

(Pablo being one of the worst)

Maybe Chuckie Boy can tell his superiors at NBC to stop propping up Steven Colbert, thus enabling his lunacy.

Eff Chuck Todd is really incensed that he and his Leftist media-hack brethren have lost control of the narrative and they don’t quite know what to do to get it back. They stand up there, spouting Leftist talking points, and not enough people are drinking their Kool-Aid. Sure, the bobbing-head Leftist followers & swallowers nod their heads in brain-washed agreement…but OBAMO’s dismal approval ratings prove that the ‘help’ Todd & ‘those of his ilk’ are providing really isn’t helping at all.

We all agree that this is happening, and we all agree that this is good.

It will take a constitutional amendment to be able to take back the country from the damage corporations have inflicted on the process.
I support Move To Amend’s  efforts! 
“We, the People of the United States of America, reject the
U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in Citizens United, and move to amend our
Constitution to firmly establish that money is not speech, and that
human beings, not corporations, are persons entitled to constitutional
rights.

The Supreme Court is misguided in principle, and wrong on the law. In a democracy, the people rule.”

Sign their petition:  http://movetoamend.org

So close to being right.  Citizen United removes the contribution limit for corporations to “independent” organizations.  Super Pac’s were PAC’s able to accept donations.  Anonymous gazillionaire donations from corporations to Super Pac’s IS the contribution of Citizens United to our growing plutocracy.

says the Limabugh fan to the Glenn Beck fan

god, your disinformation is ALL over this thread.

Chcukles just cannot accept legitimate criticism of the absurdity of his reality show.  For Chuck, a very large salary is at stake in making the American people believe in the silly minutiae of the reality show that is a Presidential election.

Upwards of a billion dollars will be transferred from corporations and people to TV stations and media figures this year and Chuck ain’t lettin’ a couple of comedians highlight the absurdity of his “professions.”

I’d recommend you live in reality, where my free speech and Sheldon Anderson’s free speech are not equal.  No matter what the Court said in Buckley, money is not speech.  We’ll get this changed and public financing of campaigns sometime in the next 20 years

I smell “Open Society” and “MoveOn” money, which means the ultimate users of money as political speech, George Soro and crew are hip deep in this.  Pity.

It’s OK for the Satirist to hit everyone one else, but don’t you dare touch the media darlings.  I think we might actually see one of these guys actually come unglued during this election cycle.  

perhaps worse than that … much is from the writers behind the comedians.

Your smeller would confuse a rose with a pile of bullshit.

2008′s $13.5mn figure includes a contested Democratic primary with three strong candidates.

This year’s $12 million is for the Republican primary alone.

Whoops.

Unfortunately, this is a Constitutional Republic, not a democracy. If it were a true democracy, our congressional representatives and senators would poll us about how to vote on every bill; instead, once elected, they magically forget about all the lies they told during the campaign and vote however they feel at the moment (i.e. however the lobbyist which paid them the most tells them to vote).

Stephen
Colbert is a comedian, and the other Republican candidates are bad jokes. Pat
Paulsen and Andy Kaufman tore down the gates, opened the door, and Colbert has
charged through the portal!

Yes, kinda like going hunting. We both have a right to go except you must use a slingshot and I can use a rifle.  Fair, isn’t it?

It’s sad that the only media that is actually dealing with the issues is a pair of comedians. I guess there’s just too much power floating around for any other way. The jester’s role in the king’s court was to mock the king when the king deserved to be mocked because the rest who surrounded him were to interested in keeping their roles/lives to contradict the king. I guess that’s what we’ve gotten ourselves into. 

The process has made a mockery of itself. Colbert and Stewart are only shining a light on it. 

Leave it to Chuck Todd to get a dingleberrie wedged up his ARSE in a breach position.If you’re that damn stupid to question what’s up,then you certainly don’t have a clue WHAS UP!!!! You need to get a job selling gelato or asking Newt for that cleaning job.You know,something basic enough that won’t challenge your critical thinking skills-that are evidently sorely lacking and not well suited for the present position your woefully attempting to articulate.TAKE A BATH-THEN GO LOOK FOR A JOB!!!!!!!!

Amen!

Just out of curiosity counselor, which ones right to free speech is more important?
To bad SCOTUS has upheld Buckley every time since that decision. It was a Per curiam decision.

Was it also wrong in Davis v. FEC?

Or are you just a terrible lawyer that hates to be wrong?

His bad comb over is another cry for help. The political process in this country didn’t need SC to become a mockery, it was doing fine all by itself.

Citizens United from the looks of it. It’s your train, Barry.

However, I cannot think of any way to regulate outside spending on
political ads. Freedom of Speech just blows away any strategy or tactic I
can imagine. If the Koch Brothers want to spend 100 million dollars for
ads showing their art collection: no problem. The same money advocating
their products: again, no problem. Why would we be able to stop them
from telling us their political views? The only people we can regulate
here would be those wanting to become our employees, and this is just
what the non-collusion clauses regulating the Super PACs are doing.

Exactly right, and we would be well served if we were all to keep that bolded part in mind at all times.

The only out for me is huge changes in personal decision making brought
on by education and encouraged critical, even sceptical reception of all
ads. Can anyone imagine that?

If we don’t start imagining that, we’re hosed. Again, we’re getting exactly what we deserve and it’s the price we pay for being lazy and uncritical.

It’s even harder to blame it on the GOP, which is what Pork Chop was trying to do.

Meanwhile, you’ve brought absolutely nothing to the table, Timmah!

Who told you life was fair?

The decision was unanimous, you blithering idiot.

SCOTUS agrees with the Constitution, the administration disagrees.

Well, sure. No advertising, no television. That’s where they make the majority of their money. Duh.

It is a mockery…when the Primary Dealers to the Federal Reserve met with Romney the 14 th of Dec. and the “ads” stared running the 15-16th. The Super Pak for Romney is the same banks that selected Obama. Yes, its a mockery when Banks chose the president..over and over.
But let the voters worry about comedians with ‘hidden agendas’ instead of the issue. Get face time instead of Policy discussion…yeah its a mockery..and hipocracy.

Remember the Swiftboating of Kerry? That was the result of independent money expressing an opinion on the candidates. It was not called a SuperPAC, but it operated the same way as Adelson giving $5 million to run down Romney and build up Gingrich. Super PACs, per se, are not the problem.

I analyzed Turk’s mistaken assumptions above re: the significance of Citizens United. The rest of the bread is typical bullshit, paleo-con authoritarian reasoning from you, eg, “well, commie symps, that’s the way it is” followed by “money is speech.”.

Only you can look at a broken system, which again in the next few weeks will produce a nominee you hate, and defend because people you like even less say it is broken. Only Pablo, beliver in “the stimulus didn’t work,” “Obamacare is a govt takeover of medicine,” “the financial crisis of 2008 was created by a piece of 1970′s legislation, which took 35 years to blow up,” and “Jimmy O’Keefe with his dildo boat is my hero,” could defend a system which no longer works and results in an extended reality show. A system which ignores thecAmerican people’s wishes, because the corrosive influence of big money, and defend it because “liberals don’t like it.”.

Enjoy the Romney coronation, Pablo, and keep defending the crap system which produces him.

And, here, almost alone in the world is an election a vast profit making opportunity for TV and radio. Elections shouldn’t require profit for TV owners at the expense of warping the entire governing process.

Stephen Colbert isn’t making a mockery of the electoral system he’s making a mockery of SuperPACs that are making a mockery of the electoral system.  Any system where you can have UNLIMITED ANONYMOUS donations is making a mockery of the democratic process.  There should be a maximum personal or corporate donation, probably higher than the one now for PACs, maybe in the 500-1000 range as a compromise.  But no person or corporation should be allowed to donate more than $xxxx to a campaign or PAC and every donor should be listed.  Fundraising should require time and effort from the campaigning party and if someone has to run a campaign off of, gasp, a couple million dollars then so be it.  Maybe the focus of the election could be on the issues and the one on one debates more so than countless ads or attack ads. 

It’s not but it should be made as fair as possible. Unfortunaltley your party does not want to allow that.  That is called GREED.

Chuck Todd typically makes a lotta sense. His left-leaning reporting is something that one has to filter a bit but he’s fair, credible and thorough in his analysis.

Greed is an bad attribute and nothing to be proud about. Yes, it doesn’t matter how you window dress it, it is plain greed. goodbye . Case closed.

You’re aware that super PACs have no such limits, aren’t you?

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57340900-503544/unlimited-campaign-cash-fuels-super-pacs/

The problem isn’t that some people are “more” influential. The problem is that the rich are influential to the point where they drown out any influence which may come from the poor.

And what do the rich do with all that influence? On politicians, they influence policy to make sure they stay rich and the poor stay poor. On people? They pepper them with enough ads, lies, and partisan talking points to make them believe what they want them to.

Don’t be too quick to call other people “dopes”, because you got it wrong.  
Citizen’s United legalized unlimited corporate and union spending through Super PACs.  Individuals always could.

Don’t let the comedians on Fox news do your thinking.

Chuck can’t quite wrap his head around this concept of comedy. Where do comedians get off making fun of things? Sure they make people laugh but what is their hidden agenda? Chuck you taint mustached stool.

It’s the place where you can meet millionaires, who are searching for their special someone. (@^_^@)