Daily Campaign Finance Reform thread-day 12

Illinois Leader ^

[Valin]

McCain-Feingold leaves him tongue-tied

Tuesday, December 16, 2003

Dear Editor:

Exactly which part of "Congress shall make no law . . . abridging freedom of speech" did the U.S. Supreme Court not understand when it upheld the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (BCRA) which prohibits parties and interest groups from running “issue ads” naming a federal candidate for 30 days before a primary or 60 days before a general election?

Freedom of speech and of the press were put in the Bill of Rights by the Founding Fathers for a reason, so government could not tell people what they could say, when they could say it, or how they could say it.

To silence political opposition is not reform, it is incumbent protection. In any other context, it would be called censorship. In any other country, it would be called repression.

You know what they call it when criticizing your leaders is illegal, when campaign speech is regulated, supervised, watched, controlled, authorized or prohibited by an agency of the national government? It’s called dictatorship.

Thomas Jefferson stated the case against BCRA eloquently when he said: "I am…for freedom of the press and against all violations of the constitution to silence by force and not by reason the complaints or criticisms, just or unjust, of our citizens against the conduct of their agents."

As Justice William O. Douglas, once said: ”It usually costs money to communicate an idea to a large audience. But no one would seriously contend that a limitation on the expenditure of money to print a newspaper would not deprive the publisher of freedom of the press. Nor can the fact that it cost money to make a speech - whether it be hiring a hall or purchasing time on the air - make the speech any the less an exercise of First Amendment Rights.”

Nothing disinfects like sunlight. The best reform would be to let anybody contribute any amount to any candidate with the immediate disclosure of all contributions on the Internet and let a free people decide on their own who is being corrupted.

Sincerely,

Daniel John Sobieski Chicago

[Valin]

If ou would like to be on/off this Campaign Finance Reform list, please let me know.

Yesterdays Thread.
Daily Campaign Finance Reform thread-day 11
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1044395/posts?page=12

[Valin]

Hugh & Series, Critical & Pulled by JimRob
Special to FreeRepublic ^ | 17 December 2003 | John Armor (Congressman Billybob)

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1042394/posts



This is nothing like the usual whine by someone whose post was pulled. JimRob pulled my previous thread for a good reason. "If direct fund-raising were permitted on FR, it would soon be wall-to-wall fund-raising."


So, let's start again correctly. This is about civil disobedience to support the First Amendment and challenge the TERRIBLE CFR decision of the Supreme Court to uphold a terrible law passed by Congress and signed by President Bush.


All who are interested in an in-your-face challenge to the 30- and 60-day ad ban in the Campaign Finance "Reform" Act, please join in. The pattern is this: I'm looking for at least 1,000 people to help the effort. I will run the ad, and risk fines or jail time to make it work -- AND get national support.


But there should be NO mentions of money in this thread, and not in Freepmail either. This is JimRob's electronic home, and we should all abide his concerns.


Put your comments here. Click on the link above, and send me your e-mail addresses. I will get back to you by regular e-mail with the practical details.


This CAN be done. This SHOULD be done. But it MUST be done in accord with JimRob's guidelines.


Fair enough?

[4CJ]

You know what they call it when criticizing your leaders is illegal, when campaign speech is regulated, supervised, watched, controlled, authorized or prohibited by an agency of the national government? It's called dictatorship.

AKA, The Incumbent Protection Act of 2003.

[RippleFire]

bump

[Valin]

My hand is up!




But then I am dumber than a small pile of rocks.

[Smile-n-Win]

Excellent letter to the editor!

[DustyMoment]

My thoughts exactly. I want to cut-and-paste (plagiarize) this letter and send it to my own newspaper.

I wonder if Mr. Sobieski would mind?

[kimmie7]

I'd like on your CFR list, please. Thanks!

[The_Eaglet]

To silence political opposition is not reform, it is incumbent protection. In any other context, it would be called censorship. In any other country, it would be called repression.

Thank you for debunking the deceptive misnomer of a working title for this bill.

Did your letter get published?

[The_Eaglet]

McCain-Feingold(from the blogasphere) -Daily Campaign Finance Reform thread-day 27