(Image source: WMBF News)

BY BLAKE HANSON

Satirist and now-GOP Presidential Candidate Stephen Colbert’s Super PAC -- excuse me -- “The Definitely Not Coordinating with Stephen Colbert Super PAC” is out with a new ad endorsing Herman Cain -- well, kind of -- check it out....

“A vote for Herman Cain is a vote for America. He’s not a career politician. He’s such a Washington outsider, he’s not even running for President.”
“On January 21st, vote Herman Cain.”

The joke being -- well, Herman Cain suspended his campaign more than a month ago. Jokes aside -- Colbert sat down with Rock Center correspondent Ted Koppel to talk PAC v. Super PAC -- and how he thinks the word “super” has changed elections.

COLBERT: “It would be stupid to be in the 2012 campaign or want your voice heard in the 2012 campaign and not have a Super PAC.”
KOPPEL: “Indeed you are correct because the Super PACs have already spent more money than the campaigns.”
COLBERT: “They’ve spoken more money.”

In fact, The Washington Post says Super PACs are outspending the actual campaigns 2-1 in South Carolina. The Philadelphia Inquirer talks about the impact of Citizen’s United, which allowed for the creation of Super PACs.

“In essence, the court weakened the power of all but the wealthiest to determine elections' outcome.
A once-surging Newt Gingrich became the first casualty of Citizens United in the current presidential race after a Mitt Romney-supporting-super-PAC spent millions on three weeks of negative advertising that turned Gingrich into a fourth-place loser in the Iowa Republican caucuses.”

But a writer for The Atlantic says super or not -- the money flow remains the same.
 

“If we didn't have super PACs we'd have 527 groups. If we pass laws to clamp down on 527 groups, some new organization would emerge. Money flows regardless of whatever leaky, legal dams we erect. Closing one loophole merely opens another. “

And a fun fact: Saturday’s South Carolina Primary will be the second anniversary of the Citizen’s United decision.