Posted on 09/16/2004 5:04:47 AM PDT by publius1
SOROS' $$ TOPPLES DA IN WAR OVER DRUGS By KENNETH LOVETT Post Correspondent September 16, 2004 -- ALBANY —
In an unusual infusion of big money into local upstate politics, billionaire George Soros poured cash into the Albany County district attorney's race — and engineered a stunning defeat of the incumbent because the DA supports the strict Rockefeller drug laws.
The Soros-founded Drug Policy Alliance Network — which favors repeal of the Rockefeller laws — contributed at least $81,500 to the Working Families Party, which turned around and supported the successful Democratic primary campaign of David Soares.
Trying to become Albany's first black DA, Soares on Tuesday unexpectedly trounced his former boss, incumbent Albany DA Paul Clyne, who has opposed changing the drug laws. The victory was overwhelming: Soares took 62 percent of the Democratic vote.
"This was more than a local race, that's what the [Soros] funding shows," said Assemblyman John McEneny, who supported the challenger's candidacy.
Soros, an international financier and philanthropist who says he is dedicating his life to defeating President Bush, favors legalizing some drugs.
Clyne backers claim that the Working Families Party, using the Soros money, illegally involved itself in the Democratic primary. They charge the Soros cash was used to target Democratic voters with mass mailings and phone calls labeling Clyne as the reason the drug laws were not reformed, as well as highlighting his anti-abortion stance.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
In this era of such effective propaganda manipulation;
hiding of the truth; poor education; scarce critical thinking; poor literacy; poor discernment . . .
and where, more than ever,
MEGABUCKS = MEGAPOWER in the market place of ideas and philosophies,
I think your stance may be overly naive.
I also believe that the rules for someone deliberately and consciously trying to destroy our government, our way of life, our culture--those rules ought to be a bit different for such enemies--truly of the people.
Or do you also think that Jihadi's need to have extensive protection accorded to all others who are committed to living under our Constitution and supporting it?
i think the Constitutional issues are serious and tricky.
SO IS SURVIVAL.
There would be no need to offset SOROS in a local election because SOROS wouldn't be able to donate to them either.
You cannot walk into a voting booth and pull the leaver for a canidate, you cannot contribute to them, PERIOD.
That is the only campaign finance reform that is needed, and the only one that would work.
Are you saying that Congress does not have the power to regulate the interstate trade of drugs?
I'm sooooooo glad that THE KING IS COMING and the days of such evil idiots as Soros are increasingly very limited.
Alas, their destructiveness between now and then will be extremely extensive.
Thanks for your great points.
I think your stance may be overly naive.
Free speech should never be tampered with, AT ALL.
My right to support others who's ideas are the same as mine is fundamental.
The people will sort it out.
What, you want to ban the drug alcohol?
Exactly where did I say that?
You suggested that there was no freedom to destroy families and lives with drugs; alcohol is a drug that has destroyed families and lives.
The question at hand is; Is it tyranny for the judicial system to punish those individuals that engage in a criminal activity?
No, the question is: Is it tyranny for there to be laws against activities that harm only the participants?
How so? Please elaborate.
I just don't see my own naivite on this score, I guess. But I'm happy to try and see it.
Death penalty for drug use. Death for graffiti. Death for skateboarding. If we agree it's OK, WE'RE not morally culpapble. It's the criminals who MADE us kill them!
Gosh, I miss the Taliban!
They have the power to regulate interstate trade for the purpose of encouraging manufactures, generally exercised as a means of overruling state laws pertaining to interstate commerce that have the effect of discouraging manufactures.
Free speech does not trump the right to self govern.
Foreign moneys infringe on the rights of people to self govern, and that is the most fundamental right of a free society.
Without the right to self govern, all other rights are effectively meaningless.
Sorry, I do not agree with your argument and reject it completely.
If you cannot vote for a person, you cannot donate to their campaigns, period.
And if they found it acceptable, it would be just fine by you?
No, they don't; people may heed or ignore the messages bought by that money, as they choose.
That's strange, I didn't see mine either.
Not true, elections can and are bought and sold by money, if they weren't Soro wouldn't have dumped the money he did. You can show it time and again the statistical effect of outside money on races.. its not a mirage its a fact.
If you can't vote, you can't donate, PERIOD. Free Speech rights do not trump rights of self governance.
It'll never happen of course, because that would actually keep races on topic and make them about ideas and things and not about parties playing politics for national reasons in local elections... etc etc etc.
Once elected the Politician has no allegences but to his own constituents, serves them and must rely on them and them alone for his future carreer. Not the DNC, not the RNC, not Some far flung corporation, not some Union kickback. You can't vote for em, you can't donate to them, period.
I plant a seed in my backyard.
Cultivate and harvest the plant.
Consume the plant.
And the Federal govt. is empowered to regulate this because of the Interstate Commerce Clause?
i'M SERIOUSLY asking you to explain mine to me.
If it's there, I'd much rather see it than be blind to it.
It seems to me that it's somewhat naive to imagine that someone like Soros is not going to be EXTREMELY destructive to our government and our way of life.
Sooooooooooooooo destructive, in fact, that we MAY WELL NEED to take some very energetic steps to block such destructive efforts however we could rationally and properly do so.
Being tooooooo protective of his 'right's strikes me as about as silly as bending over backwards insuring that all the prisoners in Guantanamo etc. have a long list of tax payer supported protections and legal HELP.
These are ENEMIES, group. They are out to DESTROY our way of life. They have said so. They have repeatedly taken umpteen steps--many very effective--to do so.
What will it take for us to wake up and say--enough, turkey, stop it or sit in a very small room for a very long time, or worse.
As it stands now, the Federal gov't can prohibit drugs all it wants since drugs that don't cross state borders are indistiguisable from those that do.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.