[Radix]

Important issues here.

[Radix]

Ping.

I do not maintain a ping list. All of you do, I think.

I am shocked, that the Boston Globe, allowed this article to be posted on their web site.

I have other thoughts, but, I am tired, and slumber calls to me.

[jocon307]

Great post, excellent article. Hiawatha Bray (what a name!) has done a very good job of plainly showing how this disgusting and (apologies to the dimwits on the SCOTUS) UNCONSTITUTIONAL law hurts ALL politically involved people.

"Maybe if Congress cited a couple of examples where people used the Internet to say people should write their congressmen, [the High Court] might say, `Yeah, we've got to regulate that,' " said the ACLU's Gora."

For once I agree with the ACLU. But then again, for another thing I want to stand up for Planned Parenthood too now. If I see a PP ad supporting a candidate, or trashing another one, that gives me good, useable information. If PP is for them, I'm against them. And I fully support their right to spend donors' money (not my tax dollars) to inform me of their views. It helps me as a voter, and besides, even if I hate it, why can't they do it?

This is one decision that is definately going to join Dred Scott and Roe v. Wade in the Supreme Court Hall of Shame.

[steve in DC]

I strongly advise lots of print ads on the three days leading up to the deadline, with issue oriented groups saying "In three days this ad will be illegal!". "In two days this ad will be illegal"... Explain why, and then toss in a gratuitous slam agianst one or another candidate. Preferably one that voted for that stupid McCain Feingold bill.

Let the people begin to understand what the law means.

[68-69TonkinGulfYachtClub]

Good Read Ping

Radix : Thanks for posting this.

[agitator]

ping

[steplock]

"Which means that we're about to enter the golden age of Internet politics, as millions in cash that can no longer be spent on TV and radio ads will make its way online"

I'll take some of those MILLION$$!

For Sale - One good Webmaster Designer - reply here!

Experienced with Political Election Websites

[Wilhelm Tell]

I predict that they will try to regulate news stories that might have a negative effect on a politician's chance to be elected or re-elected. They will bring back a draconian version of the "Fairness Doctrine," and then they will close the "loophole" of "unfair" criticism over the Internet and in print media. Some liberal groups like the ACLU will be more or less opposed to it, but other leftist organizations (pressure groups) will support it. "Moderate" Republicans will "reach out" to the far left and make this possible. The political class is so audacious and emboldened that they dont' even pretend to respect the Constitution.

[Hondo1952]

Somebody is asleep at the wheel at the Globe. Must have been all the editors day off.

I didn't know I was a gorilla. Hey Radix, meet you at the Golden Banana. WooHoo, big fun. I bet we don't hear a single Garth Brooks or Alan Jackson song in there. What a sacrifice. I don't think I've heard either of them in the last six months.

I do believe ol Hiawatha is doing a little profiling. Isn't that against the law in Mass? My memberships didn't ask me what kind of music I like. I don't believe it said anything about guerrilla tactics either. I may be wrong. But I don't think so.

[autoresponder]

McCain-Feingold/Shays-Meehan attempted to regulate emails and computers and websites originally.

They wanted to say your computer and software costs made you into a political "PAC" and could therefore be regulated and/or banned from political sppech ot mention of any candidates during that 60-30 day period.

I see some very serious repercussions from CFR.

Very serious.

"Very"

[autoresponder]

McCain-Feingold/Shays-Meehan attempted to regulate emails and computers and websites originally.

They wanted to say your computer and software costs made you into a political "PAC" and could therefore be regulated and/or banned from political speech ot mention of any candidates during that 60-30 day period.

I see some very serious repercussions from CFR.

Very serious.

"Very"

[farmfriend]

Rights, farms, environment ping.

Let me know if you wish to be added or removed from this list.
I don't get offended if you want to be removed.

[Fledermaus]

I'll spend all the money I want and I'll run ads on radio, TV or in the paper 30-60 days before an election if I want.

Let the toothless FEC come after me. And if the Justice Dept. bothers, I'll just go on camera and say, "we are in a war against terrorism and the Justice Dept. has time to arrest me for freedom of speech"?

I say tell SCOTUS to SHOVE IT and violate these "laws" with impunity.

[MarkL]

The problem is that while the Internet IS a powerful tool for communications, the leftists AND the media will work together to blast
"the people" (TM) with whatever spin they want... And let's face it... Those without Internet access (and political interests) far outnumber those who do. If they can get the uninformed to vote, then it's all over.

Mark

[redrock]

A so-called 'Conservative' Congress passed the restriction on the 1st Amendment......

A so-called 'Conservative' President signed it into law......

A so-called 'Conservative' Supreme Court upheld it.......

....and now...it's being left up to us to refuse to obey it.

I think that we are up to the task at hand.

redrock

[redrock]

A so-called 'Conservative' Congress passed the restriction on the 1st Amendment......

A so-called 'Conservative' President signed it into law......

A so-called 'Conservative' Supreme Court upheld it.......

....and now...it's being left up to us to refuse to obey it.

I think that we are up to the task at hand.

redrock

[Eva]

One of the main reasons that this is important is that the communist group, MoveOn.Org is using the web to bring in foreign contributions for Dean and now Clark, as well.

[El Gato]

Should the Internet become a loophole to undermine the federal laws meant to protect the integrity of the electoral process?" he mused. Indeed, critics say there's nothing to stop its being applied to the Net.

I think these statist SOBs see the Bill of Rights as one big loophole. (Of course, in a way, it is. But that was the point of it). Since the 'net is carried over both landlines and microwave/satellite links, I'm sure they will argue that "broadcast" includes the net. The law specifically excludes the 'net, but they'll find some black robes to rule that that only means that portion that is not "broadcast", and since it's seamless and you can't really tell, nor control, how your data is transmitted, that means that the whole 'net, save perhaps that part from your ISP to your computer, can be considered to be "broadcast".