Call the WHite HOuse to Thank Bush for CFR!!!

[Maceman]

For what good it will do, I just called the White House switchboard (202-456-1111) and conveyed my extreme outrage at Bush for not vetoing CFR when he had the chance.

I hope you all will do the same.

BTW, the operator told me "you are not alone."

Let's shut down the WH switchboard with howls of protest.

If I wasn't still even more terrified of the Democrats than I am of the Republicans (albeit barely at this point), I would never support Bush in '04 after this.

[baxter999]

No. There was not a single part of this bill that was good. One of the main reasons is that Free Speech is a God-given right recognized in the first amendment. Slander and libel are already illegal. Political speech, even paid political speech should not be illegal.

Another is that this bill was just a revision of a previous bill limiting free speech that was in itself unconstitutional.

[billbears]

Thank you for a well reasoned response. And I agree with you

[baxter999]

And your point (if you have one) is ?

[MJY1288]

"Anyone sneaked a peak at Dirty Underpants to see their take?"

Stay away from there, your keyboard will smell like the north end of a south bound Mule after visiting that ceptic tank

[onyx]

You lost the debate before you started. The question was turned on its head, just to bait losers like you. Congratulations, sucker.

[arasina]

Such outrage! Oh, the outrage! Dean would never have let this happen, right? LOL

[onyx]

Never, not Deanmento --- why he's raised a whole $25 million to spend on his "free" --- I mean, fast and loose speech.

[No Blue States]

I never knew politics could be so dramatic, so serious, yet at times so extremely hilarious or contradictory.

"You're may be finding it hilarious again when you have to change your screen name before next November, No Blue States."

Thanks for the heads up FRiend, If that happens I might have to change my nick to "No Blue States That Bush Didnt Carry". heheh

Its a conspiracy against me,the changing of color schemes for elections. Bush is on on it with the Saudis and Israelis, they have my phone bugged too probably.

;o->-<

[onyx]

To: ModernDayCato
I know exactly what kind of judges the Democrats will install. I prefer to take my chances with Bush and the Republicans. I also know that Dean or any of the other Democrat candidates would be a disaster for America. No thanks, I'll stand by Bush even if I hate some of his decisions.

108 posted on 12/10/2003 8:45:55 PM EST by Jim Robinson (All your ZOT are belong to us.)

[MJY1288]

This bill was about a whole lot more than free speech, it adressed Union Dues being used to support the DNC even though the Union Members and contributors of those Union Dues had no choice of how their contributions were being used.

It addressed soft money donations from groups that could easily hide straw donors from foriegn countries (Remember John Riady)

And raising the limit on individual contributions from $1,000.00 to $2,000.00 and Household contributions from 2 to 4 thousand

[baxter999]

Come on, put up or shut up. I haven't seen a single of your charges against veracruz substantiated. Let's see this article of yours where you explain away these liberal policies of Gonzalez.

(BTW, don't you even realize that by stating you have an article explaining this guy's liberal actions away, you are admitting that he did DO these liberal actions?) Just thought I'd point that out for fun.

And regarding your asinine comment about conservatives must always rule in favor of the current law, do you really suggest that a true conservative should vote against a ban on abortion because it goes against the current law?

Regards.

[arasina]

I agree with everything stated in Jim's post, except for his tagline. :o)

[onyx]

Agreed. FR mail.

[sinkspur]

I'll wait for Veracruz.

[Sunshine Sister]

Thank you! Sometimes doing battle on FR is hard. All I want are honest people. In politics that is hard to find.

[billbears]

Congratulations, sucker.

LOL!!! That's it? Congratulations sucker? Note which of us resorted to name calling

Well you've convinced me!! We need 60, heck 80 Republicans in the Senate. As if it mattered anymore. You haven't made one statement refuting that no matter how many Republicans are in office, the fact is that this bill should have never made it past the Senate, it should have never been signed, that 3 of 7 Republican appointed Justices forgot the Constitution and the rights therein

Nope, we just need more Republicans so we can go on to nominate even more moderates to the Supreme Court. Because that will really, really help won't it? Maybe they can argue the Constitutionality of the AWB when it's signed right?

You lost the debate before you started

No this nation has lost, but you really don't care do you? 'we' are in charge so that makes all injustices to the document that founded this nation A-OK in your world.

[ETERNAL WARMING]

any law which stifles and suppresses political speech, regardless of when it is said, is unconstitutional. Period.

AMEN! I think they passed this law to silence Third Party Candidates. They are the ones hurt by this. The fact that they have allowed the Leftest media to be the only political voice prior to the elections says it all.

It's time they payed the price. NO MORE CAREER POLITICIANS! No more electing those who will NOT uphold the Constitution! No more electing those who will NOT uphold our laws period! Enough is enough!

I will be writing in Alan Keyes. Is he perfect? No..but he's got more going for him they the two headed hydra system ever will imho.

[baxter999]

"I prefer to take my chances with Bush"

What is all this taking chances and gambling away of my constitutional rights? Don't Jim Rob and the rest of you Bush supporters get it? Take a shot, gamble, hope, pray, take my chances, etc.? Is this really all you've got to offer?

Golly gee, we couldn't actually expect Bush to have used his constitutional power of veto, could we? I mean it's so certain and easy. Where's the fun in that? WWHD? (What Would Hillary Do?) I'll bet she and the NY RedTimes and the Washington Pravda would have pouted, and we Republicans just can't have that now can we? Oh the horror - the horror!

[ETERNAL WARMING]

All this handwringing and the standard (Bush has lost my vote) reply by those who never voted for Bush to begin with is so predictable it's almost sad. How many times has Bush lost your vote?


Well how haughty of you. For your information, some of us have been here on FR since the early days. We've supported Republicans, worked for their elections, given them money and voted for them. Shallow? LOL

[baxter999]

Union dues should be addressed differently. And it is just as wrong to limit my contribution to 2000 bucks as it was to 1000 bucks. The principle is the same. It isn't the governments business who I support politically. The funny thing is that these laws still limit people like me while the Soros's, Fonda's, Turner's and Rockefeller's of the world can spend money without limit through their tax exempt front organizations.

You seem reasonable. Do you really think that this law would limit them or me most?