Someone explain to me why, if I believe in free speech, I'm supposed to think the Supreme Court decision to allow corporations to pour unlimited money into political advertising is a good thing? The Wall Street Journal tried, but all I could see was a special-interest hawker tying himself into knots. Corporations aren't people, though in many aspects of the law they're treated like people. They're made up of people, each of whom has the right to give money to candidates, to PACs, to campaigns. Now stockholders in corporations get two voices, and I only have one, and that's free speech?