Does it strike anyone else as funny that The Republican Governor’s Association is acting all bent-out-of-shape over whose PAC violations deserve more attention from the Attorney General, theirs or that of the Democratic Governor’s Association?

This is what we’ve come to.  In the surreal world where money equals free-speech, only codified and strengthened by the Citizens United decision, we must endure countless squabbles like this.

Most Americans (and I say this with well-acknowleged statistics to rely upon) barely have a pot to piss in.  If they have one, they are most likely on the lookout for the repo man.

Free-speech? If you only get what you can pay for, the majority of Americans have far less than their fair share.

So what gives with all the RGA snivelling about victimization?

(Repub. Gov.’s Assoc. lawyer, Chris) Roy said the GOP group believes it is the victim of selective prosecution by the state Attorney General’s Office on the donation issue. Both the Republican Governors Association and the Democratic Governors Association collect money nationwide the same way, but he said only the GOP group has been targeted for violating the state’s donation limit.

Assistant Attny. General Megan J. Schafritz  doesn’t think so:

“We don’t feel there is any evidence of bias or disparate treatment,” she said. She noted the Attorney General’s Office earlier in 2010 had chosen not to pursue a campaign finance complaint about the GOP group after concluding there was insufficient evident to support the claim.

And there is the small fact that the RGA outspent the DGA, more than two-to-one on that particular campaign cycle; so it’s hard to weep real tears of sympathy.  

It’s hard to weep real tears for either side.  We’re talking hundreds-of-thousands, even millions of dollars in the case of the Republican Governor’s Association, scattered to the four winds in order to exert outside influence on Vermont’s domestic elections.  

How much of a “job creator” was that expenditure, I wonder?  I’d wager, not much, considering the sectors that are suffering right now.

I suppose it could be regarded as a make-work project for the AGO, but a whole lot of social service providers would probably much rather see that money spent to relieve the suffering of their clients.

Unless we gird ourselves to eliminate private funding from election campaigns, we can look forward to a future in which our pay-to-play democracy begins to look more and more likeTerry Gilliam’s “Brazil,” and less and less like Frank Capra’s “Mr. Smth Goes to Washington.”