You've got to love those guys, Steven Colbert & John Stewart; they may be the best political comedians ever, and nothing shows the ridiculous, the absurdities, better than satirical humor. How better to show people how super PACs abuse the democratic process than to have one and use it to steal the show. But rather than George trying to interview Colbert as a serious candidate (As Colbert says, "Good luck with that.") why isn't he asking about the real issue, the misuse, the abuse, of super PACs? Colbert says is plainly, it's about free speech, and the money, because the more money you have the more speech you can buy. Why aren't people outraged when they can see how sleasy the whole business is when someone is right up front about it? Hand over the fund to a buddy, who does your dirty work, while the candidate disavows all knowledge, all connections, and all responsibility for the attack ads. Why is it taking a couple of comedians to bring up serious issues that threaten our democratic process? At least the USA isn't so far gone that it resorts to censoring such political satire, and this is the best since Pat Paulsen sort of ran for president with his flag-lined suit. And Paulsen might be the only person as hard to interview as Colbert.
Camponotus: A Sugary High
14 hours ago in Catalogue of Organisms