Supreme Court Handing Down Ruling in Campaign Finance Reform (main parts upheld)

FOX News | 10 Dec 2003 | FOX News

[July 4th]

Reports that main portions of McCain-Feingold are now being upheld! People currently wading through a decision of over 300 pages.

[PhilipFreneau]

>> The A and S acts made it a crime to LIE about the government.

Actually there were two parts to the Sedition Act.

The first part had the strongest punishment, and no mention was made of untruthfullness. It stated:

"Unlawfully to combine or conspire together to oppose any measure of the government of the United States, &c.This section was not complained of. "

The 2nd part, with the weaker punishment, is the one you are referring to. It made it a misdemeanour to publish false, seditious writings against government, as follows:

"To write, print, utter or publish, or cause it to be done, or assist in it, any false, scandalous, and malicious writing against the government of the United States, or either House of Congress, or the President, with intent to defame, or bring either into contempt or disrepute, or to excite against either the hatred of the people of the United States, or to stir up sedition, or to excite unlawful combinations against the government, or to resist it, or to aid or encourage hostile designs of foreign nations."

[Howlin]

So would I.

But we do for now.

[retrokitten]

I think the ad is a great idea. How would something like that be organized?

[jmc813]

Nothing. I just wish you losertarians would hurry up and go there, so we could put a fence around it and charge admission.

Why the douchiness?

[jaugust]

Couldn't agree more. Main Entry: abridge Pronunciation: &-'brij Function: transitive verb Inflected Form(s): abridged; abridg·ing Etymology: Middle English abregen, from Middle French abregier, from Late Latin abbreviare, from Latin ad- + brevis short -- more at BRIEF Date: 14th century 1 a archaic : DEPRIVE b : to reduce in scope : DIMINISH 2 : to shorten in duration or extent 3 : to shorten by omission of words without sacrifice of sense : CONDENSE -From Merriam-Webster Congress by enacting CFR and the President signing it have in fact "abridged" freedom of speech by special interest groups and "others".

[billbears]

What is it you don't understand? I vote for people elected and nominated by their constituency, not the White House or the godforsaken RNC. I voted for Snyder in the primary and did not vote for Dole in the race.

You want a list of names? Why? They haven't been approved by the White House and the RNC, so I doubt you would have heard of them anyway. But fine, a short list, Zell Miller, Ron Paul, Jim Snyder, willing to stand up for what they believe instead of what party they belong to. I know that's not popular but that's what it takes to be a conservative in my book

[hchutch]

I've long become accustomed to the disdain from the folks who think of me as a "heretical conservative" over a lot of this. I've stopped worrying about it.

[Howlin]

just saying that in my experience you get very invested in these threads

You bet I do. I don't ever plan to sit idlely by when a bunch of people who never voted for a good man call him a traitor or say he's commited an impeachable offense.

and it drives you to say things you don't mean.

Now there you go again, almost caling me a liar. I mean every word I said; am I mistaken sometimes? You damn right I am. Never said I wasn't; never claimed to be. I said I didn't recall what I said, but that doesn't seem to be enough for you.

I held out the possibility that this is occurring on this thread.

How charitable of you.

[dixie sass]

Z'at you GRRRRR? Really truly! You are so right, big time mistake. The intention was good and I did think that the Supreme Court would rule against it on First Amendment, but...

Merry Christmas, my friend. See you at Paltalk!

[Mo1]

And the law would not be Constitutional if it had been vetoed. It wouldn't be a law at all.

You are assuming that the veto would not have been over ruled and passed into law

[NYC Republican]

I'm sure you'd much prefer that those of us who don't think the world has come to an end or that the president should be impeached would just leave this thread so you all could have a jolly old time, patting yourselves on the back, telling each other how right you were, and discussing how you'll not vote for this man again because of your principles. And yet, you all openly mock this man who is doing the best he can. Better than anybody else out there. You're openinly discussing denying him your vote in hopes that he won't win reelection in 2004, you know, to teach us "not real conservatives" a lesson. And you have the nerve to sit here and talk about what WE are doing to this party and country? Don't be misled: just because I'm one of a few on here doesn't mean that there aren't a lot of people out there who agree with me. They just don't want to take the crap you all dish out. I guess I am the stupid one.

I agree with you wholeheartedly. It's these "purists" that almost got Bustamante elected- and more than a few openly admitted to it... Single issue voters are so marginalized, it's not even worth convincing them otherwise

Bush will likely win in a landslide, so to heck with them...

I'm a proud conservative, though I'm pragmatic, and I vote for the best candidate outt here... To me Bush is eons better than Dean, so the choice is obvious. Heck, he's been a great President, albeit he's made some mistakes.

The votes Bush picls up from moderates will dwarf the votes he loses to these single-issue folks.

[Moby Grape]

NO Supreme Court appointee of Bush will be confirmed by the present Senate...ONLY a large shift to a more conservative Senate will result in ANY positive move in the SC.

[BureaucratusMaximus]

just because I'm one of a few on here doesn't mean that there aren't a lot of people out there who agree with me.

I'm not touching that one...it speaks for itself. I believe that actually defines delusion better than what I could of came up with.

I guess I am the stupid one.

Because you're one of the few here, it doesn't mean that there isn't alot of people out there who....oh nevermind.

[aristeides]

Ever heard of recess appointments? They are most definitely constitutional.

[rintense]

I'm not a Bush hater. But I fail to see any advantage for anyone in this ruling. This whole Bill put politics over the Constitution- which is so wrong, I can't even begin to explain. We cry the loudest when liberals undermine the document on which this country was founded. Now, when a strategy of letting the SCOTUS decide has failed, who do we place our faith in to uphold the Constitution? Right now, I'm drawing a blank, because I haven't seen ______ done by either party to insure the rights guaranteed us by the first amendment.

[the gillman@blacklagoon.com]

Please ping me when you are prepared to act re: your ad.
I will sign it too.

[Howlin]

How about somebody YOU can vote for?

[aristeides]

Big advantage for incumbent politicians.

[dixie sass]

Ummmmmmm, well, except for us. We can critize them all we want! Maybe once the politicians see how they have hampered themselves...

Naw, that's two much to hope for, isn't it

[MichiganConservative]

Why do we have to think of new and better ways to get our message out? I thought this was a "free" country, as in Free Speech! Just exactly who am I hurting by saying "Congressman X is a scumbag." on TV? Oh yeah, I'm hurting the senses of all those Soccer Mommies, that just don't want to hear people argue. Oh it hurts the ears so!