Bush urges immediate end to 'soft money' ads

THE WASHINGTON TIMES ^ | August 6, 2004 | Bill Sammon and Stephen Dinan

[hushpad]

>>>>Anything to protect W, eh? This is what I mean by professional Republicans. If a guy with an R after his name does it, whatever it is, you'll justify it.


Sorry! I got ahead of myself. I meant that GWB should not say anything - that he should remove himself from it entirely!

There is no justification for silencing the voice of the people no matter what the circumstances, or who the party is.

[TBP]

The reality of the matter is that the SCOTUS has said that this kind of campaign speech is not protected by the First Amendment.

Then the Supreme Court is wrong. At least 5 or 6 of them wouldn't recognize the Constitution if it introduced itself.