Well, I'm back again, and I really don't now what to think!  The Federal Supreme Court has done something so egregious, so mind-boggling, that I truly don't know how to describe the state of my emotional response.   They overturned 103 years of judicial opinion and law and decided that corporations were not only 'persons', but that they had even more rights than individuals like us.  They removed spending caps for political advertising which will create a Tsunami of political advertising that has the potential to eliminate our choices in candidates even more than already exists.  Not to mention the now legal bribery of all elected public servants.  In fact it will eliminate the term 'public servant' from common usage.  The few honest public servants that exist in office will quickly be eliminated by the power of advertising dollars that will surely be directed at these people through control of media which is already a recognized problem in our culture.  Rupert Murdoch will surely snap up this golden opportunity to profit from this while furthering his own political agenda.  After all, he controls tons of media outlets and IS a corporation .  The answer is surely obvious to anyone else who is feeling despair at this moment.  And that is a bipartisan, grassroots movement that tells Congress to completely circumvent the Courts' Activism by enacting campaign finance reform, shutting down the money flowing from K Street and prohibiting bribery in all its' forms. (Trips, promises of jobs in the private sector, actual cash donations over and above 2,500.00 from any individual)  This would mean that corporations,(which the court recognizes as 'person') would be limited to a single 2,500 dollar donation as well.  All lobbyists would work for salaries and actually have to persuade legislators by the logic in their arguments.  In other words, is the current position fair to the general public?  Does it treat the lobbyists' client fairly?  Would a change in position mean greater good or harm?  Would the current or considered position violate constitutional law?     There are many laws on state and federal books that are obvious violations of constitutional law and a glaring example is the battle currently being fought for Gay rights.  But there are many others that are difficult to wrestle with simply because the subject may need to strike a balance between competing interests (like the pro-abortion-pro-life debate, when is a woman recognized as a person, when is she just a container?).  But first and foremost is the basic tenet of Public Safety and Welfare.  That is why we have Health and Safety codes, building codes, consumer protection laws, etc.  When Democrats swept into office one year ago, those of us who are progressives thought we would finally be addressing the obvious inequities in our society.  Doing the right thing for us all was finally getting a seat in the front of the bus.  Well, what I soon realized was there are millions of people who consistently vote against their own best interests because they are quick to believe in the rhetoric they are being fed.  We are all susceptible of course, but much of this is simple laziness.  Especially now in the 'Age Of Internet'.  The truth in all its forms is available and all you need is the ability to read and the conviction that you must not casually give away your vote to the 'sweetest singer' you hear.