You want to know how much I'm on this primary? Just look at today's New York Times, OK? They got some story about me getting a referendum on the South Carolina ballot. Throw it up there. Colbert Pushes "Corporations Are People" Referendum Look. Look, folks. I don't know where reporters get these wild ideas, other than my press release and the follow-up phone interview. But here's the truth. I love South Carolina, it's my home state. And it is from that rich culture that I get my love of liberty, my personal values, and my chemical dependency on barbecue sauce. I love it even more than I love Colbert Super PAC. You know our motto, say it with me, "Making a better tomorrow, tomorrow." You're good. When we founded my PAC nine months ago, nation, I promised that you would be players in 2012. Your voice would be heard in the form of my voice. And you would be heard on the issue you most cared about: corporations are people. And folks, they are people. If you prick a corporation, does it not bleed? Now technically, it doesn't, but it does sue, so do not prick them. So folks, I was thrilled last month when I got the sample ballot for the South Carolina Republican primary, and I saw this referendum. You like that referendum? You like that? I do. I like that referendum a lot. That's almost exactly how I would have phrased it. In fact, that's almost the exact wording I sent to the South Carolina Republican Party two months ago, along with a sizable cash offer to put this referendum on the ballot. Jimmy, let's see the referendum again. OK, now put up my e-mail. Now do some CSI stuff with it. Wooo! It looks like Colbert Super PAC... is in the poll position. Now, it just goes to show you what unlimited Super PAC money can do. Also, the Super PAC paid for the sunglasses. So, I got you your referendum, nation. Unfortunately, last month, the South Carolina Supreme Court ruled that non-binding, advisory questions, like this one, couldn't be placed on any presidential primary ballot. Really, South Carolina Supreme Court? No non-binding questions? I believe that South Carolina deserves the right to vote for something that couldn't possibly have an effect. After all, Jon Huntsman's on the ballot.

So because of the South Carolina Supreme Court decision, Stephen had South Carolina Democratic Party chair Dick Harpootlian come on to help him out, as the GOP in the state declined to petition on behalf of Stephen.

In a 3-2 decision, the Supreme Court ruled against Greenville, Spartanburg, Beaufort and Chester counties in a lawsuit filed against the state and the Republican and Democratic parties that asked the court to declare that the primaries weren’t authorized to be conducted by the state and the counties as they had been in 2008. The counties also argued that the state is forcing taxpayers to pay for what they said is essentially a private contest. The suit alleged that counties across the state were forced to pay nearly $1 million in combined costs for the 2008 presidential primary because money set aside by the Legislature for the purpose was inadequate. The justices on Monday said they wouldn’t rule on the funding issue between the counties and the state, finding that it amounted to a “nonjusticiable political question.” The court’s decision cleared the way for officials to hold the GOP's “first-in-the-South” presidential contest in the state on Jan. 21. The state funded the primaries in 2008, but the state’s political parties operated the presidential primaries prior to that.

Now, it seems that the actual question the South Carolina Supreme Court was looking at was how some counties were upset they had to shoulder the costs of paying for the presidential primaries starting in 2008, which had been funded by the Republican and Democratic Parties of the state in the past.

Now, in case you were wondering, the 3-2 split doesn't seem to be a Dem-GOP split. Chief Justice Jean Toal voted in the majority, and she served as a Democrat in the South Carolina House for over a decade. Donald Beatty, who dissented, also served in the House as a Democrat.



Also, Stephen is still talking about having his own South Carolina GOP debate since Donald Trump got one.

And Stephen looked at how a pro-Huntsman PAC airing ads in New Hampshire is being primarily funded by... Jon Huntsman's father Meanwhile, Jon blasted the Senate for approving by such a huge margin the defense appropriations bill that contains language to indefinitely detain even American citizens without a trial for being suspected of being or aiding or "supporting" a terrorist.He then covered the story of the drone that Iran got its hands on.