Senator Signs Endorsement Deal with GM

Newly-elected Senator Scott Brown has become famous for coming out of nowhere to win the Massachussetts Senate seat held for decades by the late Ted Kennedy. In addition to winning a seat long held by his opponent's party, Brown became the poster child for the Republican plan for the 2010 elections. While many feel that his victory is priceless, General Motors decided that the Brown name did have a dollar value and announced him as the first in what they hope will be a stable of professional lawmakers to publicly represent the GM brand.

[caption id="attachment_676" align="alignright" width="250" caption="See, GM is helping already!"][/caption]

GM spokesman Robert Jackson said, "We are very excited to welcome such a hot, new name into the General Motors family. As Tiger Woods showed the industry, you can't be too careful whom you choose as spokespeople. The General Motors brand is a lion of America, just like the state of Massachusetts."

When asked if they were concerned about "skeletons in the closet," Jackson answered, "No, not at all. We hired the same vetting team John McCain used to investigate Sarah Palin. They assured us everything is fine."

The deal was made possible because of the recent 5-4 Supreme Court ruling that ruled that corporations can spend as much as they want on political advertisements. While they cannot contribute directly to individual campaigns, they can do things like run advertisements either for the candidate they support or against the candidate they oppose.

While concrete terms of the deal have not been released, it appears that Brown will wear a small, tasteful, GM lapel pin, although the company source stressed that the pin would not be worn above the flag pin.

Brown would not comment publicly on this story, although a spokesman for the Brown campaign wanted it made clear that Brown's daughters were also available for sponsorship.

Outrage to the ruling has not swayed GM. "The arguments presented were obviously strong enough to convince five of the esteemed justices on the nation's highest court. Who are we to argue?"

Justice Anthony Scalia cited the precedent of Horton vs. Who, in which the court ruled that since "A person's a person, no matter how small, the reverse must be true. Since size is not a factor in determining personhood, it is reasonable to assume that a person's a person, no matter how large. It then follows that a corporation, which is really just a group of people, as they could be arranged in an overhead picture to be in the shape of a very large person, qualifies as a person. It's very clear."

Justice Clarence Thomas sided with the majority, saying, "Look at Voltron. It's a group of multiple parts coming together to make a whole, just like a corporation. You wouldn't tell Voltron he doesn't have freedom of speech, would you? I sure wouldn’t. I mean, it's Voltron. He has a sword."

Liberal groups have claimed that this ruling means that corporations would now be able to influence elections, creating a system in which elected officials are directly beholden to corporate interests, rather then the current method of indirect beholdenness through lobbyists.