What's Free May Not Be Good For Us. Especially Speech.

       How does freedom of speech enter into the conversation when a wealthy individual decides to donate substantial funding to a candidate for office in a different state for an office that does not represent that individual? Is that the freedom of speech that must and should be protected under the first amendment? How is it, why is it, a right to financially influence that candidate who will represent people other than those who are bankrolling his campaign? If I am to represent you, why should I take funds from someone who I will not, nor cannot, represent?
       It's even worse when that candidate seeks a judgeship where the donor does not live or work. This seems to me to be a misuse of the term freedom of speech. Just having more money than the next guy shouldn't give anyone more freedom of speech or even more speech than that next guy. How is it that money is the determining factor in freedom of speech? Or at least the shear volume of speech?
       I look at it like this. One man, one vote = one man, one speech. Wouldn't that be a great rule for campaigns? What if candidates could only give one speech? They could answer questions, but only one speech, one time. They'd have to make sure that what they said was really important instead of all the drivel we get now. What if your money would only buy you one speech for your candidate? But the next guy, who doesn't have your money, would get that one speech too. There'd be a better chance for the most respected person to win the election.
       The way it is now, it's not so much the best man, or woman, but the best funded and therefore the best campaign strategist and the best TV ads. I think I'd like it better the other way. I think I'd rather have the best person for the job, not the best funded. And I have to say that the folks we've been getting have been the best funded in many cases, but few have been the best person for the job.
       Another thing I don't understand is how come freedom of speech means you can lie all you want and it's still freedom of speech? If it's a lie, and it often is, it's still protected. Why isn't lying illegal? It is illegal if you lie to a cop or judge, but okay to lie to the people. Then again, sometimes it is illegal to lie to some people. Try to figure that one out.