To me, super PACs just seems like a backdoor for candidates to run political campaigning unrestricted by the standard regulations that they are governed by. Normally they are required to abide by a large number of guidelines such as a budget cap (no such restriction is being applied to these committees) and certain rules regarding what they say and how they say it. The super PACs are not under the same scrutiny, and therefore can run much more aggressive campaigning, and since legally these committees cannot be directly associated with the actual campaign, which means that the candidate these organizations are supporting will never have to take responsibility for something said by the PAC, such as a slanderous comment, or a controversial one. This is the type of thing that should make you afraid of your government, when they begin back-dooring rules- and even more when they don't have to take responsibility for them.

Today's program addressing the Lisa Simeone/Caitlen Curran controversy was a good start. I was very disappointed that the clear and repeated publicly expressed opinions of Scott Simon [NYT Op Ed page promoting the war in the Middle East] and Maura Liasson's work on Fox was not discussed. Will this be the topic of another discussion?