the conspiracy: In 2000, Congress secretly passed the National Economic Security and Reformation Act (nesara). But George W. Bush and a cabal of Supreme Court justices and other dark figures have blocked its implementation. No wonder—the law requires the president and vice president to resign; would bring troops on foreign soil home; and best of all, would end the federal income tax and zero out all personal debt. Some nesara believers think it will also hasten the Second Coming.
the conspiracy theorist: Shaini Goodwin, a.k.a. "The Dove of Oneness," a Washington woman who hits up supporters for help to fund the law's implementation. She recently promised to turn a $5 million investment into $150 million in eight weeks.
In "The Attack Ad's Second Life," Leslie Savan and I examined the idea that the newfound ease of video production and distribution will kill off the negative election ad. Are the days of Willie Horton and "Haroldcall me" over? Are we headed into an unregulated, bottomless pit of "macaca" moments on-demand and YouTube mash-ups? Advertising Age columnist and On the Media Host Bob Garfield thinks that TV ads are definitely on the way outand that's a good thing: "Nobody is going to opt in to see somebody's legislative votes misrepresented in an attack adbecause why would you?" Yet that's not to say that TV ads won't play a role in 2008, or that they won't be as lowdown and dirty as ever.
And now, a new Supreme Court ruling virtually ensures that that will be the case. In another 5-4 decision, the court struck down a provision of the McCain-Feingold campaign reform law that prohibited pre-election ads paid for by unions or corporations. The majority ruled that such ads can not be banned unless they explicitly encourage voters to vote for or against a candidate. This will no doubt open the floodgates for a new slew of "issue ads"attack ads that not so subtly go after candidates under the guise of informing voters. What this really meansfor online fundraising, for swing voters, for the future of McCain-Feingoldremains to be seen. But it seems clear that even if the 2008 race is the TV attack ad's death rattle, its demise will be anything but pretty.
Two can play this game. In response to Dick Cheney's claim that he's not part of the executive branch, Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-Il.) is taking him at his word and proposing cutting the vice president's office from executive branch funding. Says Emanuel: "If the vice president truly believes he is not a part of the executive branch, he should return the salary the American taxpayers have been paying him since January 2001 and move out of the home for which they are footing the bill." Should the proposal pass, Senate President Cheney would presumably receive full funding to execute his constitutional duty to periodically tell lawmakers to go F themselves.
Well, that sure ended badly. The Supreme Court ruled today that public schools can limit students' speech if they express themselves in a way that might be construed as pro-drug. The case in question involved an Alaska student who'd been suspended after he unfurled a tongue-in-cheek banner reading "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" at a school event. Chief Justice Roberts argued that because the banner just might give someone the idea that toking up is OK, it could be suppressed: ''The message on Frederick's banner is cryptic. But Principal Morse thought the banner would be interpreted by those viewing it as promoting illegal drug use, and that interpretation is plainly a reasonable one." By that standard, couldn't someone reasonably interpret the banner as a religious message and therefore demand its protection? Apparently not.
When this case hit the docket a few months ago, I figured it would be a novelty. Boy, was I wrong. The decision was 5-4, but you already knew that, right?