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.

[concerned about politics]

Trolling DU...

The devil is in the details
The bill also makes it illegal to air ads criticizing a politicians before an election. And the money it criminalizes is the type that the Democratic Party uses to catch up to Republicans.
Bye-bye free speech! The FEC can now take away your home, car, bank account etc. for saying something bad about a politician on TV or radio right before the election!

Bush and the Republicans have no problem raising "hard" money. That's actually the backbone of their fundraising machine.
Democrats, on the other hand, don't have as many people who can afford to write $2,000 personal checks on the spots. That's why more of the Democrats' money was "soft" money from unions.
This bill has killed the Democrats' ability to raise money. The fundraising gap between Republicans and Democrats has been getting even wider because the GOP wasn't as dependent on soft money.
This "campaign reform" act is the GOP's best friend.

I dunno. Think this is in response to moveon and Soros $$$.
Since it is talking about "soft money". Used for ads that do not endorse any candidate directly. I think it might be bad, but like I said, I dunno.

[rintense]

But we've been waiting, and waiting, and waiting for these to happen- and they haven't. Heck, even many here on FR say a recess appointment isn't a good idea.

The time for playing nice is over. But I don't think the President has realized that yet.

[Beck_isright]

"Their goal is to out Bush, obviously."

Not hardly. W is the only thing between the US still standing and our nation becoming Canada Jr. But with the Constitution falling daily, think about the consequences when and if the B*itch from NY becomes President any time in the future.

[JCEccles]

Big advantage for incumbent politicians.

Huge advantage for incumbent politicians. The legislation will serve to effectively stifle criticism of incumbents when it most matters: just bfore an election when the electorate is paying the closest attention.

[Beck_isright]

I'll wait to see the 9th's actions before passing judgement. I don't believe that applies to "attack ads" which FR will be accused of almost immediately.

[concerned about politics]

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

Yepper. It has to be done, too.

[SevenDaysInMay]

I'm going to keep doing what I've been up to for the last two decades and complicate it by running for office with our Ratified Bill of Rights, "equal rights" of the 14th Amendment, and impeaching rogue (bad behavior) blackrobes as my platform. Ratified Constitutionalism - for LIFE.

I shall also become a journalist self-publishing pursuant to our 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, 9th, 10, and 14th Amendments.

The debate is simple and all we need to consider. What our government will pay to us is one side, the private and corporate welfare plantation rule by fiat. What lawful authority our government shall have is the only enduring matter before us, despite being at war.

In this beginning phase of islamofascists' Terror War, this Constitutional battle for our lawful self-government will be ferocious because Americans are already at war with our islamist mortal enemies through our government, the same government which has nullified our RATIFIED Constitution, the only lawful basis of our government's being.

If only most FReepers and five of our friends and family members get involved, we can change this outlaw goverment one state at a time.

We have allowed our government's temporaneous office holders to become our rulers. It is time to rebuild it by replacing the enemies of our Republic, "if we can keep it". Franklin was correct.

Our only other option is Concord Bridge II with Yorktown II or the Clintonazis' 1993 JBT full-auto assault on a church-home of 142 souls as our fate.

Power has corrupted. The Clintonazis' corruption demonstrated what the power of the State, enjoying their self-created "sovereign immunity", inflicts upon Those People.

What is the difference between your family sitting at home on any morning and Mt. Carmel? A specious arrest warrant for one person served by a small army firing into your home with video for the convenience of the agency's budget hearings before a Congressional committee.

The armed citizen checked the police powers of the State. The Government shall not let that happen again. Americans must not believe that urban warfare lessons learned overseas will not be used on the next Mt. Carmel's men, women, and children.

We shall either have a lawful, RATIFIED Constitutional Republic form of government or The Un's New World 1984 Order. We can not have both. Our rulers have so proclaimed; they are in power.

It is passed time to decide. Will our elected government rulers and SCOTUS allow it?

No.

Our founders pledged their all, their sacred honor. Do we have any at all?

Our rulers in Government have made enemies of The People by its uncontrolled comtempt of our lawful form of government.

[the gillman@blacklagoon.com]

...Ah, personal accusations. The last resort...

In your case, the first resort.

[oceanview]

maybe you should find out what paper would run that ad first. its illegal now after all.

[BureaucratusMaximus]

Democrats, on the other hand, don't have as many people who can afford to write $2,000 personal checks on the spots.

There's no end to there victimization.

(quietly sobbing)

[Moby Grape]

Can you inform of any SC recess appoinments in history?

[Judith Anne]

I agree with Howlin. I haven't said much on this thread, left it a long time ago, because some people are hysterical.

[FirstPrinciple]

I am not disagreeing with you. The point is the Alien and Sedition Acts were overturned and the party responsible for it disappeared from the political map. What should happen to President Bush for signing this drconian measure into law? Furthermore, I think Bush showed a clear dereliction of duty when he signed it into law. He was banking that the SC will have enough courage, more than he does, to overturn this law. That is a violation of his oath of office where he is supposed to uphold the Constitution. He overlooks his duty that he heads a co-equal branch of the govt and has as much power in interpreting the COnstitution as any other branch. The buck doesn't seem to stop in his desk, it simply starts there.

[Howlin]

Hopefully you can seperate listening to other's opinion and reading from your RNC fax flash.

I see; so it's fine for you to get your opinions from Rush or Sean or Savage, but anybody else is off limits?

Speaking of limiting free speech/thought.

[aristeides]

Incumbent protection is the name of the game. Hence the gerrymandered districts. Hence the Supreme Court striking down term limits. And hence this CFR law.

Read Dr. Tom Coburn's book, Breach of Trust: How Washington Turns Outsiders Into Insiders.

[Miss Marple]

I don't disagree with you, but the fact is that until we get the law reversed, we are going to have to think of alternative ways to get the message out. Stamping our feet and saying that it's not constitutional won't work, because the SC is the final say on constitutionality.

So, let's try and work around it and also work on getting this provision reversed.

[Mo1]

Not as a matter of principle, though I think Soros is a scumbag.

I'm for free political speech, including that of scumbags.

I also wouldn't have a problem if someone gave Bush the same amount.

Oh Ok ..

[aristeides]

Can you inform of any SC recess appoinments in history?

Earl Warren, Bill Brennan, Potter Stewart.

[Sabertooth]

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

Yes I am, and it was a very safe bet.

CFR didn't get 60% in either chamber. You think even more Republicans would have voted for it to override Bush's first veto?

Not a chance.

On the other hand, sending CFR to the Supremes with Bush's signature was a bad move. The SCOTUS routinely upholds campaign finance restrictions.

The strategery was to take the Democrat' (non) issue away. Now CFR has been given new life and legitimacy by the President's signature and today's ruling. This won't be the last such bill we ever see.

This is a debacle, and not just politically. The Constitution has been injured, and is going to be targeted for more of the same.

Perhaps our party will give the strategery a rest and actually make a stand on a principle or two.

[JCEccles]

Many people are angry--not hysterical. Cogent and substantial concerns and criticisms have been raised by angry posters.