The New York Times never fails to amuse

The Times has an editorial today called "Time is not on our Side" deploring the fact that the Supreme Court has not yet decided on the constitutionality of the McCain-Feingold law and, specifically, the ban on soft money. The case is moving through the court way too slow!

The Supreme Court may be facing another hurried rendezvous with the nation's electoral system, this time with the new law that banned unregulated "soft money" campaign donations. The court needs to rule quickly on the legal challenges to the law, but time is running short and the issue is taking a disturbingly long time in making its way through the lower courts.

The editorial board of the NYT has always been a staunch supporter of McCain-Feingold, and now that it's law, you would think they'd be happy. But NOOOOOOOO!!!! [insert John Belushi voice]. Suddenly, they're agitating for clarification, which may reverse the ban on soft money. Why?

Here are two articles that may illuminate the situation: Fund-Raising Gives G.O.P. A Big Lead In Last Cycle and Dems stewing in own campaign finance juices

Now ask yourself: if the ban on soft money helped the Democrats more than the Republicans, is there a snowcone's chance in Hades that the Times would have run the same editorial? I think not.