Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: hellinahandcart
It's either that, or contemplate the shrinking list of things you're still allowed to do legally.

Actually, I have two minds regarding the advertising ban if that is what you are upset about.

If the purpose is to have orderly elections, we need to have them be as rational and factual as possible. With the ban, we will still get the dirt dished to us, it will just happen months in advance of the election instead of the day before. for example, the DWI report regarding Bush was saved for maximum damage. Voters reacted emotionally with few facts and without the entire story. Now, if there is damaging information the card will have to be played early on. If its truly bad it will stick. If its just a dirty trick, it will pass to the memory bin by November.

On the other hand. I don't like the precedent it sets and I don't like the problem that occurs if damaging information is discovered after the deadline. The precedent could begin a process by which congress controls more and more of our public airways for elections.

1,063 posted on 12/10/2003 11:24:34 AM PST by VRWC_minion (Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and most are right)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1039 | View Replies ]


To: VRWC_minion
You're wasting text on me until the moment you type the words "THEY HAD NO RIGHT TO DO THIS. NOT CONGRESS, NOT BUSH, NOT THE SUPREME COURT".
1,079 posted on 12/10/2003 11:30:14 AM PST by hellinahandcart
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1063 | View Replies ]

To: VRWC_minion
the DWI report regarding Bush was saved for maximum damage

Wasn't the Bush DWI thing released by a member of the Press? Wouldn't he be free to do that again, as the CFR law doesn't silence him.

we will still get the dirt dished to us, it will just happen months in advance

Maybe you'll know, but you probably know in advance anyway. Most people who vote don't even pay attention till a couple days before the election. They won't know what the media doesn't want them to know. And they'll get their news from MTV, not FOX. They're not called "useful idiots" for no reason.

1,360 posted on 12/10/2003 1:23:01 PM PST by MichiganConservative (Repeal the welfare state and the 14th, 16th, and 17th Amendments.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1063 | View Replies ]

To: VRWC_minion
the DWI report regarding Bush was saved for maximum damage. Voters reacted emotionally with few facts and without the entire story. Now, if there is damaging information the card will have to be played early on. If its truly bad it will stick. If its just a dirty trick, it will pass to the memory bin by November.

Such reports will be issued as press releases, or just by some reporter who talks to someone, they will be deemed "news" and thus not subject to the restrictions. However if your group wanted to reply to the accusations, either because the candidate was one who consistently supported your group's position, or because the "allegations" dealt with something of interest to your group, your group could not make that statement, or at least could not get it out, except at the suffrage of the major "news" networks.

1,817 posted on 12/11/2003 4:26:44 PM PST by El Gato (Federal Judges can twist the Constitution into anything.. Or so they think.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1063 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson