IT'S ALL ABOUT TIMING!

I'll admit that I'm not always the sharpest knife in the drawer. In fact, if truth be known, sometimes I miss the drawer altogether

Perhaps that's why the most recent constantly changing Supreme Court ruling on campaign finance limits has me puzzled.

I mean, I wasn't done struggling with the "United" decision when along came "McCutcheon" - which I think said, by loosening up how much you and I kick in to politicans we have increased our "free speech"  as guaranteed by the First Amendment."

You see, dumb me, I thought I already had enough free speech. I sure didn't know there was a "food pyramid" like measurement out there somewhere.

 So, please help me here, is expanding free speech now like pouring STP into your gas tank to extend your engine life?

Maybe, free speech is like purchasing a P.L.U.P where you meet with your insurance guy or gal to determine just how much coverage you need in order to be completely protected from lawsuits.

Then I started thinking, "What is the difference between "free speech" and "bought and paid for speech" - has that changed too?"

I openly confess I value my current level of "free speech". It's why I can write some of the outrageous things I do, and still have them published.

What if that changes too? Right now it's free, but do I have to get on-board in order to retain - or even possibly increase - my amount of free speech in the blog world?

Is there someone out there in the blog publishing business who might guarantee my right to even more free speech if I would just be willing to kick in a few shekels?

Then, the insecure kid in me came back and I foolishly wondered: "If I do that, couldn't it be interpreted as some subtle form of bribery?"

You see, I don't want to go to jail if  I do this wrong.

Besides, I'm not all that sure increasing the size of my P.L.U.P  coverage is any guarantee I'll be adequately protected from bribery charges.

So, I thought maybe I should look up the definition of  bribery, since honestly, (no pun intended) in my confused world, I'm a little shaky on this whole idea about giving folks money in order to protect my rights.

I asked myself, "Self, where is it going to stop?"

Will I now start seeing TV ads from Supreme Court members soliciting contributions similar to the current political ads we're constantly bombarded with?

If so, will the format be similar to the deliterious attorney advertisements we're buried with seeking our money under the guise of protecting us from the evil insurance companies?

Perhaps I should immediately contact Amazon.com and go online to order up the latest musical CD, "The Best of Justice Roberts and The Supremes"?

Now, there's a "cookie" that just might protect me.

More determined than ever to do "the right thing", and desperately seeking answers, I finally did look up the definition of what I used to think was called "bribery."

I found two of them: "An act of giving money or gift giving that alters the behavior of the recipient."

I thought, "Isn't that what most individual campaign donors and PAC's want?"

But, that wasn't enough for me. I wanted the true "legal" definition. So, I sought out the one in Black's Law Dictionary.

I wanted to be sure I was getting "the real scoop!"

"Black" defines bribery as: "The offering, giving, receiving, or soliciting of any item of value to influence the actions of an official or other person in charge of public or legal duty."

Now, surely you can understand - sharp knife or not - I'm more puzzled than ever.

And, poor "Boss Tweed". He has to be spinning in his grave.

Sorry, "Tweedy Bird" - it's all about timing!