To: nickcarraway
If they want this, at least do it the honest way; a complete Constitutional ammendment overturning the First Ammendment.
2 posted on
12/11/2003 6:02:38 PM PST by
nickcarraway
(www.terrisfight.org)
To: nickcarraway
We need some new justices on the court.
3 posted on
12/11/2003 6:03:03 PM PST by
Cicero
(Marcus Tullius)
To: nickcarraway
Who among us would have predicted Justice O'Connor would stroke out during her last year on the bench?
To: nickcarraway
Buy and/or start your own newsletter/newspaper.
6 posted on
12/11/2003 6:11:18 PM PST by
xzins
(Retired Army and Proud of It!)
To: nickcarraway
the divided court said Wednesday, the nation is better off with limits on the financial influence of deep-pocket donors even if money can never be divorced from politics.
The court ruled 5-4 that rooting out corruption, or even the appearance of it, justifies limitations on the free speech and free spending of contributors, candidates and political parties.
I thought the Supreme Court ruled on law , not what they feel is best for us. Law: What right do they have to decide that something justifies over ruling the Constitution. This court is running wild with the Constitution. They dont interpret The Constitution they amend it to suit themselves and say it is justified.
We have the Dems making up their own rules in Cobgress and the Supreme Court amending the Constitution , something has to be done , but God knows what ,Hopefully enough Republicans will get elected in 2004 to give GWB that Supermajority we desparately need.
7 posted on
12/11/2003 6:13:53 PM PST by
sgtbono2002
(I aint wrong, I aint sorry , and I am probably going to do it again.)
To: nickcarraway
We're not allowed to run ads either telling the truth about our candidate or telling the truth about the opponent for two months before an election. What part of the First Amendment does the SCOTUS not understand?
10 posted on
12/11/2003 6:26:13 PM PST by
cake_crumb
(UN Resolutions = Very Expensive, Very SCRATCHY Toilet Paper)
To: nickcarraway
Now that it's Constitutional to do so, the Republicans ought to use their majority to cut off all the funding to the Democrats, while permitting funding to the Republicans. Certainly, the Democrats would do so if they were in power.
To: nickcarraway
John McCain whistling the theme to the Bridge Over the River Kwai is something I have become quite accustomed to. He has his white whale and we are a much poorer country for it.
14 posted on
12/11/2003 6:29:47 PM PST by
jwalsh07
To: All
26 posted on
12/11/2003 7:07:03 PM PST by
Bob J
(www.freerepublic.net www.radiofreerepublic.com...check them out!)
To: nickcarraway
.
34 posted on
12/11/2003 7:19:06 PM PST by
ATOMIC_PUNK
(A nation of sheep will eventually beget a government of wolves !)
To: nickcarraway
But .. we know there will be a showing of harm (but that doesn't necessarily mean the harm will be the loss of an election).
How do we know what these people will do .. we know because we know the basic characteristics of the liberals. Give them an inch and they will take 10 million miles. They will go full steam ahead and prove once again what pukes they are. I really have no doubt they will pull out all the stops to try to damage some conservatives.
38 posted on
12/11/2003 7:49:53 PM PST by
CyberAnt
(America .. the LIGHT of the World)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson