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.

[NittanyLion]

Huh?

I don't need to go back through the archives. I know very well which side you were on.

[Mo1]

LOL

[Dane]

Remember your words when Rush, Hannity, Savage, Boortz, etc. all go off the air or talk about breast enlargement or Canadian Baby seals, 60 days before the election

Under your scenario, so will the New York Times, Wash Compost, CNN, etc.etc.

[justshutupandtakeit]

This law will not assist in that horror being realized and, in fact, will probably hurt the RATS more than the patriots.

[Who is John Galt?]

A fact of what?
your opinion?

Perhaps you've never read the Bill of Rights:

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law... abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press...

You have three choices, sport:

1) prove that Congress did not pass the so-called 'campaign reform' law in question;

2) prove that political ads do not qualify as "freedom of speech, or of the press;" or

3) prove that a ban on such ads does not 'abridge' our free speech rights.

(This should be good... ;>)

[onyx]

ROFLMAO! Happy hunting. LOL!

[js1138]

I believe the ads run recently by the Republicans, including the one on the Bush website, are testing the means to work around this law. In 2004, the issues will be so clear that there will be no need to mention names.

This law will mostly hurt underfinanced candidates who are unable to hire first rate ad agencies.

[jeremiah]

The logical consequence of this ruling is:

1) The television people will bring on critics of Republicans, those criticised will be unable to respond unless invited on the programs, leading to an unfair advantage for Democrats.

2) Since it will obviously be unfair for the Republicans, being the television and newspapers are controlled by the opposition, the "Fairness Doctrine" will be called for by the Republicans, restricting free speech on talk radio. Yep, Rush will have to have AlGore sitting beside him from noon to three, Savage will have to put up with Ellen Degenerate...........

Sound outlandish? Seems as logical as B following A to me.

[concerned about politics]

You haven't seen George Soros give $15 million to front groups dedicated to defeating George Bush? He quite candidly said that is what it was for. Why isn't that soft money? Becuase it's Move On and not the DNC.

And Bush is still kicking their ass in contributions! LOL. Those rich liberals can keep trying, but eventually they'll need money to eat!

[Steve_Seattle]

"Yep they did a great job in protecting Grey Davis didn't they."

Just because the media do not always get what they want doesn't mean they aren't influential and don't help shape the perceptions of millions of people.

[Howlin]

There isn't one to find; I never once said that I was in favor of Bush signing that law.

[justshutupandtakeit]

Perhaps you should ask someone more astute about the difference between ADS and EDITORIALS or ARTICLES. Maybe they could clear up your confusion.

[CasearianDaoist]

NO HE IS NOT KICKING THERE ASS!!! THAT IS JUST THE POINT!!!!

[Howlin]

And Bush is still kicking their ass in contributions!

With $2,000 and under DONORS!

[Dane]

The point is that CFR would not prevent a POLITICAL ad like that from running today, as long as it does not mention a candidate's name.

Take a look at your history. There was an uproar over the diasy ad. It only ran once. It was the first "attack" ad. It probably gave Goldwater 5 points, but didn't matter much since he was running behind, 70/30.

[McGavin999]

Why on earth would you sit out the next election. I keep hearing "throw the bums out" but people forget that almost ALL the republicans, with the exception of McCain and a few other idiots, voted AGAINST this law and ALL the democrats voted FOR it. So the only bums who should be thrown out is the dems. If you punish the republicans who stood up for us, why would you ever expect them to stand up for us again?

[Beck_isright]

Print media has specifically been excluded by most state laws. CNN has a communist exemption clause granted by the 9th circus.

[GunsareOK]

...When does that get cut off?...

Just give them a little more time.

[Joe Bonforte]

And Clinton appointed two of those liberals, Ginsburg and Breyer.

And Reagan appointed O'Conner, and Bush the elder appointed Souter. Your point?

[Moby Grape]

Grey Davis was HATED by a majority of CA voters...your attempt to say that the media cannot or will not effect election results does not hold water.