[PhiKapMom]

LOL!!!! Some people cannot read and comprehend it seems!

Why do they think that the NRA cannot run an ad for a specific candidate but the anti-NRA can run an ad for a specific candidate?

What am I missing here?

People need to chill out OR is this a good time to attack President Bush like some of these people love to do over and over again?

[goldstategop]

I'm not a sunshine patriot or one of those who believes a law is good only when it helps my side. I'm not one of those who believes everything goes. Sorry, but the Court will get no cooperation on this from me and neither will the government.

[Dan from Michigan]

I can tell you one difference right now. The NRA is funded by people like me. Working class individuals.

The gun grabbers are funded by rich elitists like George Soros that can dump individual (as opposed to CORPORATE) money into a bunch of adds.

[Moby Grape]

"Why do they think that the NRA cannot run an ad for a specific candidate but the anti-NRA can run an ad for a specific candidate?

What am I missing here?"

You are missing the point that the liberal media has just been handed absolute POWER of speech 60 days prior to an election...and we KNOW that they will USE this power for advocacy hidden in "news" reporting.

So the OTHER side has a clear advantage in terms of information to the public 60 days prior to an election (which is when most even start paying attention anyway)

[deport]

December 10, 2003, 10:08 AM EST

HAMDEN, Conn. -- President George W. Bush continues to lead all potential Democratic challengers in a national poll released Wednesday.

The Quinnipiac University poll of registered voters found that although former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean increased his lead among the Democratic contenders, Bush easily outdistanced each of the Democrats vying for the party nomination...........

Bush was favored 51-40 percent over Dean, 51-40 percent over Lieberman, 51-39 percent over Kerry, 53-38 percent over Gephardt and 50-41 percent over Clark.

[El Gato]

Why do they think that the NRA cannot run an ad for a specific candidate but the anti-NRA can run an ad for a specific candidate?

What am I missing here?

That a very few really wealthy men, like George Soros can run such ads as individuals, but groups like the NRA, or the much smaller but harder hitting, JPFO or GOA, cannot. Also the so called newsmen, especially on TV, will be able to distort the issue to bash the good guys (He wants criminals to have guns!) While the friends of the good guy, can't respond. The same applies regardless of the issue. One "entertainer" (BS for example) can do it one market, while another does it in a different market. We don't have that many rich guys on our side in the arms rights arena, no matter wether they call themselves Democrats or Republicans. Still the biggest threat, on most all conservative issues, and against Republican cannidates for the most part, will be the major national media, who will be much freer to distort things, and to play "gotcha", than they now are.

While this law and ruling only affects federal elections and candidates, you can bet that now that the Supreme Court has said it's OK, you can expect state legislatures to pass similar laws, where they haven't already that is.