Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 01/27/2004 7:32:48 AM PST by Valin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: RiflemanSharpe; Lazamataz; proud American in Canada; Congressman Billybob; backhoe; jmc813; ...
Yesterdays Thread
The Reform Regime
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1065466/posts




Note: If you would like to be on/off this Campaign Finance Reform list please let me know
2 posted on 01/27/2004 7:35:04 AM PST by Valin (Politicians are like diapers. They both need changing regularly and for the same reason.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: King Black Robe; DustyMoment; Smile-n-Win; 4ConservativeJustices; Eastbound; Rensselaer; ...
HOORAY For John!

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

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



Update
I've already tested the idea of my in-your-face challenge ads, first in the print media and then deliberately illegal on TV, with certain editors I have a long relationship with. I could trust these two gentlemen, one in the print media and the other in the broadcast media, with a "heads up" on what I am planning. Both said they wanted to know, in advance, when I am about to do this.

The bottom line is clear. If I am willing to put my neck on the line, with the possibilities of a fine and jail time, THAT effort will put CFR back on the front page in all media. And that is part of the point. There's not much value of going in-your-face against the enemies of the First Amendment unless the press takes up the story and spreads the word. It is now clear they will do exactly that.

Update 2
QUICK PROGRESS REPORT, ANSWERING A SUPPORTER'S QUESTION:
We have about 15% of the needed 1,000 sign-ups.

Spread the word, direct folks to the front page link on my website.

Google-bomb the phrase "anti-CFR" directing readers to that page and link. (We're already #2 and #4 on Google.)

Target date is now August, since the NC primary looks to be put back to September. (Remember, the ad isn't illegal until the 29th day before the election.)


Cordially,

John / Billybob


Note if you are interested in more on this please contact myself or Congressman Billybob
3 posted on 01/27/2004 7:36:10 AM PST by Valin (Politicians are like diapers. They both need changing regularly and for the same reason.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Valin
BUMP!
4 posted on 01/27/2004 7:39:01 AM PST by jimkress (Save America from the tyranny of Republican/Democrat hegemony. Support the Constitution Party.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Valin; jimkress
In upholding BCRA's provision that broadcasters keep public files on requests for campaign ad time, the Court noted that this provision could be used to help decide, "whether broadcasters are too heavily favoring entertainment, and discriminating against broadcasts devoted to public affairs."

This appears to be another unconstitutional aspect of the Campaign Finance Regulations that need to be repealed YESTERDAY.

5 posted on 01/27/2004 8:40:47 AM PST by The_Eaglet (Conservative chat on IRC: http://searchirc.com/search.php?F=exact&T=chan&N=33&I=conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Valin
Citizens and civic groups may have a new tool to use in pressing for more media coverage of judicial elections, adds the Campaign Legal Center. In upholding BCRA's provision that broadcasters keep public files on requests for campaign ad time, the Court noted that this provision could be used to help decide, "whether broadcasters are too heavily favoring entertainment, and discriminating against broadcasts devoted to public affairs."

uh huh...and who decides if the media is offering a "level playing field?" Who regulates the advertising dollars that keep shows on or off the air? Even if you overlook the fact that the media is nothing more than a bunch of corporate conglomerates with special interests of their own, wouldn't a "public affairs" show be subject to the same kind of corruption, distortion and in-kind contributions through advertising dollars that the so-called "sham" ads are subject to?

7 posted on 01/27/2004 12:07:42 PM PST by King Black Robe (With freedom of religion and speech now abridged, it is time to go after the press.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson