That was funny! So what's the problem? Are you trying to imply that no one should try to influence elections? Do you know how naive that is? Yet, influence is not coercion.
Freedom means a lack of coercion. We should all be
free to influence everyone else as much as we desire for that is how the
free market works. If there is censorship or suppression of
free ideas or concepts, then such cannot be vetted by
free peer approval to float to the top, only less good or bad.
I think you really need to ask yourself whether or not you view voters as dumb, pliable idiots easily persuaded by non-coercive propaganda, or rational, thinking individuals that are
free to make up their own
free minds.
Democracy cannot work without transparency.
Free speech is transparency.
Money doesn't "buy" elections either:
http://tinyurl.com/8ecxz5c
Also, before
Citizens United, 26 states already allowed
unlimited amounts to be spent on political advertising by business corporations. Many even allowed them to make contributions directly to political candidates and Virginia and Utah even allowed
unlimited contributions directly to political candidates! Was the sky falling?
When you look closer at the whole issue, you'll find that the ones raising most all of the ruckus are the politicians themselves, not any principaled opposition. They simply do not want to be criticized by
free speech or challenged politically. Due to
Citizens United, they simply no longer have any FEC protection or the ability to use the FEC as an offensive weapon. It's all a bunch of pussies crying over spilt milk. As far as I'm concerned, they can suck it up and any apologists can go along with them.
