Supreme Court Upholds 'Soft Money' Limits (first AP report on McCain-Feingold)

AP via Fox News ^ | 10 December 2003

[jmaroneps37]

This is the blacks day in my life. I have lived through wars deaths of family and friends Kenndy shot, Viet Nam 9/11 and all but this is it. If anyone with money is looking for someone to be the front and take a federal arrest over this,I think I'll volunteer. Just when had the ratmedia down for the count this happens.
Somebody tell me again how we don't need a US constitutional amendment to stop gay marriage because we'll be saved from needing it by the courts and the "full faith and credit clause" can not force gay marriage into states where the people don't want it. Tell me that one again - please.

[WOSG]

That is *not* the only provision in the law - they limited 3rd party spending on campaigns.

Are you saying the USSC upheld even that fould anti 1st amendment piece of cr*p?

[WOSG]

Justices John Paul Stevens, Sandra Day O'Connor, David Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer signed the main opinion barring candidates for federal office, including incumbent members of Congress or an incumbent president, from raising soft money.

Gang of 5 In Black Robes Strikes Against the Constitution Again

It is sorry to see how senile OConnor is getting ...

[WOSG]

Stultis the only way to make lemonade out of this lemon is to:
1. Use the new law to shut down the corrupt Soros-like funding on the 'Crats.

2. Elect more Republicans to the Senate to nominate and get approved real conservatives for the supreme court who know how to uphold the Constitution.

3. Then with a new conservative majority, take back the Constitution, which has now been trashed by the gang of 5.

[WOSG]

I cannot tell a lie. Judicial tyranny strikes again.

We dont need amendments, they too will get twisted, we need to end liberal judicial tyranny. Note that republicans (OConnor and Souter) who are liberal fell for this, but the real enemy are the Democrat Liberal judges. They want to litigate us into socialism. we need to impeach activist judges, appoint law-abiding conservative ones, and start invoking Article III section 2 on their jurisdiction to keep them in line.

[Diamond]

As of today, according to our Alice in Wonderland Supreme Court, consensual sodomy is no longer banned 30 to 60 days before an election, but speech is.

Cordially,

[Diamond]

I don't know if I'm the first to say this or not, but
WHAT PART OF "CONGRESS SHALL MAKE NO LAW" DON'T THEY UNDERSTAND?

[caltrop]

Didn't Bush say something about "over my dead body" and then signed this anyway?

[Looking for Diogenes]

We have traitors to the Constitution sitting on the Supreme Court.

It was Congress and the President who passed and signed this law. Are you saying that they are traitors as well?

[dmcnash]

I think the courts including the USC are ruling themselves in to irrelevancy. Anyone with a 3rd grade level of reading comprehension can interpret what the 1st ammendment means (as well as the 2nd, but I digress.)

If I ran the executive branch I would refuse to enforce this law. To paraphrase a famous quote...

How many divisions does the USC have?

[weegee]

So ABCDisney-Miramax can release Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 911 bit of Bush bashing agit prop 2 weeks out from the election and the GOP will be prohibited from getting soft money contributions to fight this smear campaign with tv ads?

The media's October Surprises just got that much more valuable.

[AntiGuv]

If you're pointing out Republican liberal appointees, don't forget John Paul Stevens was nominated to the Supreme Court by GOP President Gerald Ford.

[NormsRevenge]

Thank you for noting that tidbit about Gerald Ford.

[baxter999]

There is plenty of blame to go around. What did we expect from the black-robed minions of Satan? Bush is the biggest and most culpable idiot because he pretended to be conservative but didn't veto this bill. He even gave lame excuses about how it would be overturned (showing he has poor political judgement and lacks the cojones to stand for right).

In the end, PRESIDENT BUSH SIGNED THIS BILL! He deserves our contempt.

I say bring on President Clinton (Hillary this time). At least you know whose side she's on.

[DustyMoment]

According to Rush, this ruling by the SC ASSUMES that those who contribute to political campaigns support/encourage government corruption. Not only have the free speech rights of the average citizen been trampled on by the very government body charged with interpreting the Constitution and supporting the 1st Amendment, the SC has also violated another fundamental American right of juris prudence; innocent until proven guilty. By issuing a ruling that substantiates the political donation restrictions of McCain-Feingold, the Court is, in essence, issuing a blanket statement that all Americans who donate to political campaigns are corrupt and support or influence political corruption via their contribution.

It is time to start hitting the ballot box hard. Wew should also not forget that Congress passed it and Bush signed it with the assurance that the Court would overturn the prohibitions against free speech.

Well, folks, they didn't. We know what we need to do.

[Diamond]

I think the courts including the USC are ruling themselves in to irrelevancy.

Only in logic. The vast swarm of government implements those rulings, no matter how insane or evil, with force.

If I ran the executive branch I would refuse to enforce this law

I've been waiting for 30 years to see that happen, but it never does:^(

Cordially,

[Uncle Hal]

A caller asked Rush today if he thought this ruling would affect Rush and other conservative talk show hosts. Rush said he assumes the liberals would try and restrict his right to comment on the election during the critical few weeks ahead of the election but they would fight any such order. Bush signing this bill into law was a big mistake. I am sure he assumed that the USSC would rule the most onerous parts of it illegal. There is a lesson to be learned here.

[Stultis]

Stultis the only way to make lemonade out of this lemon is to:
1. Use the new law to shut down the corrupt Soros-like funding on the 'Crats.

The RNC seems to be thinking like you and me:

Campaign Finance Ruling Quotes (AP)

Rep. Tom Reynolds, R-N.Y., chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee:

(Under the new law) our fund-raising has continued to outpace Democrats. For years, Democrats pretended that they wanted campaign finance reform, all while relying heavily on soft money. Today's ruling breaks the Democrats' back."

The 'Rats however, are playing the long game here. In the end they want to outlaw private financing of political campaigns altogether.

[WOSG]

"The 'Rats however, are playing the long game here. In the end they want to outlaw private financing of political campaigns altogether."

Another reason to fight to keep a GOP majority.

With majority leader DeLay in the House, nothing like that will happen.

In fact, I hope they can repeal the unconstitutional restrictions on independent expenditures and also bring more open internet-based reporting (24 hr).

Lastly, the internet is starting to make TV and the need for mass-media money less important anyway. Just watch.