|
Author
|
|
Topic: The beginning of the end of free speech? | Topic page views:
|
|
3T3L1
Differentiated Mouse Fibroblasts
Lubbock, Texas
1347 posts, Mar 2001
|
posted 02-17-2002 08:15 AM
  
For those who aren't aware of what the U.S. Congress has been up to: quote:
On Wednesday night, the House of Representatives amended the Constitution of the United States, and stole a huge piece of our liberty...The House decided, among other things, that you and I (and any groups that we belong to or contribute to) should no longer have the right to criticize or question congressional candidates in paid ads 30 days before a primary election or 60 days before a general election. Of course, most people don't start paying attention to elections until two weeks prior. It's just people like us, the junkies, who pay attention to it all the time. So exactly when most people are paying attention is when you can't exercise your free speech rights. I get so fed up with people talking about the "big money" in politics. Why do the NRA, or NAACP, Sierra Club have no right to join together and speak?
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_021402/content/truth.member.html 
|
Duncan Kunz
Senior Member
582 posts, Oct 2000
|
posted 02-17-2002 04:18 PM
Now, let me get this straight....
There seem to be two different approaches to "campaign reform".
The first one is where the government says you can't spend your money -- your own property -- as you see fit. If I can't spend my own money, then it really isn't mine, anymore, is it? The second one is where the government takes your money -- your own property -- and gives it to some candidate whom you may or may not approve of. At least this isn't quite so hypocritical; the government comes right out and takes your money. But either way, it's theft -- of both your rights and your property.
------------------
Duncan Kunz / duncankunz@home.com
Mesa AZ / 480-891-2525
|
theseeker
One moon circles
Damnit...I'm a doctor jim
3403 posts, Jul 2000
|
posted 02-17-2002 05:34 PM
maybe I just need to read it again but the impression I get is this bill applies to *soft* money...right ?the average joe can donate however much is the allowed limit, it's the unions,RNC,DNC and large political orgs that can't run ads... and hey if you remember the ad ran in texas about the black guy that was dragged by a chain behind a pickup...and it's intent was solely to hurt Bush...and cast doubt in black voters eyes... maybe these ads are better off scrapped... T/S
|
BOB B
Senior Member
LINDEN ,TEXAS,CASS
307 posts, Jan 2002
|
posted 02-17-2002 09:09 PM
Duncan,never thought I'say this, but your opinion is the same as mine!
|
Duncan Kunz
Senior Member
582 posts, Oct 2000
|
posted 02-17-2002 09:21 PM
Seeker: These ads might be 'better off scrapped' if you accept the belief -- which is more and more prevalent these days -- that the government has the right to tell you what you can or can't do with your money.Remember that these 'soft' ads are still, in the final analysis, paid for by individuals who choose to have their money be spent this way. There are a lot of people who prefer to pool their money into a group which, they believe, can do a better job of getting their message out. Sometimes it's the National Rifle Association, sometimes the National Education Association, sometimes the American Association of Retired Persons. There're a lot of those groups which I violently disagree with, but I can't see why those people, whether they work individually or as a group, shouldn’t have the right to put their money in a kitty and use it to attack the evil (fill in the blanks). Now of course you're going to have jerky ads, like the one about the black guy being dragged to his death. And sometimes it’s our guy that gets hurt by these ads, and sometimes it's the other guy. But that's the way it is in a supposedly 'free' society: you pays your money and you gets your choice. I am surprised that any of the people in the Chemtrail forums, whom I assume distrust the actions of their own government (as I do) don’t have a major problem with that same government’s ever-encroaching hold over the freedoms of the American people. BobB: Noooooooo! ------------------
Duncan Kunz / duncankunz@home.com
Mesa AZ / 480-891-2525
[Edited 1 times, lastly by Duncan Kunz on 02-17-2002]
|
FLKook
Chemspiracy Realist
East Central Florida
706 posts, Apr 2001
|
posted 02-17-2002 11:54 PM
I'm with you Duncan! Let us keep more of our hard earned money! We all know the bottomless pit the government throws it in to.
|
theseeker
One moon circles
Damnit...I'm a doctor jim
3403 posts, Jul 2000
|
posted 02-18-2002 12:41 AM
ok...after a nice nap I re-read and the proposed amendments to the bill, the issues of "freedom of speech" echoed here and elsewhere are genuine, money equaling speech gives the one's with the most money more say, which I don't like...I personally donate to several PAC's, and will say those donations would stop if ads like the texas one ever surfaced, the RNC is NOT the DNC and they don't run negative ads of that sort,case in point the recent attack ad on elizabeth dole, I realize the gravity of the issue ad a little better now after looking at the language again...I may be right in thinking it will pass, and be signed but there are some serious legal questions that the supreme court will have to decide regarding "issue ad" provision, which applies disclosure rules and contribution limits to TV and radio advertising paid for by corporations, unions and independent advocacy groups that "refers" to federal candidates in the weeks immediately before a primary or general election.
Bad thing about this is I have to revise my position on the bill and in so I end up siding with the ACLU....and I feel like I need to wash my hands...
Something has to be done to "try" and get control of the enormous amounts of money put up by canidates for *job's* that don't pay yearly a tenth of what is spent to get the job... T/S 
|
Duncan Kunz
Senior Member
582 posts, Oct 2000
|
posted 02-18-2002 01:09 AM
I find that there are several cases where I end up agreeing with the ACLU, and it's both embarassing and annoying, especially for an old NRA member like me. But if you come down on the side of freedom, both the ACLU and the NRA are pro-freedom sometimes (and anti-freedom other times, of course).But it does make me feel weird to be on the same side as the ACLU.... ------------------
Duncan Kunz / duncankunz@home.com
Mesa AZ / 480-891-2525
|
theseeker
One moon circles
Damnit...I'm a doctor jim
3403 posts, Jul 2000
|
posted 02-18-2002 02:54 AM
one thing I forgot, if you look at the graph you can see how during the clinton years more money was needed to buy politics...lol...this is interesting... 
T/S
[Edited 1 times, lastly by theseeker on 02-18-2002]
|
penumbra
quarky
North Carolina
668 posts, Apr 2001
|
posted 02-18-2002 08:49 AM
What I heard was that there was a special session called to pass this bill... at 3am! Scallywags, all of them, both sides of the same coin.
|
Chemtrail Central Forum
UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! 
