[Jim Robinson]

"But liberals' abhorrence of political money is selective. Roll Call, the Capitol Hill newspaper, recently reported that when Democratic senators met in a Capitol room near the Senate floor to plan strategy, their leader, Harry Reid, permitted Stephen Bing to attend. In 2004, Bing, 40, gave more than $14 million of his inherited wealth to Democratic candidates and liberal groups supporting them.

Was there any appearance of impropriety—say, cash purchasing access? Gosh, no, said Democrats to Roll Call: "Reid's aides and other Senate Democrats said there is nothing wrong with such a big donor attending meetings otherwise open to only senators and a few top aides, because Bing is not a lobbyist and is not seeking any favors from Democrats." Sen. Barbara Boxer explained that Bing is "just really interested in making this country better." Oh, well, in that case..."

[af_vet_rr]

Because the attackers aim to enlarge government's control of the political campaigns that decide who controls government, the attacks advance liberalism's program of extending government supervision of life.

Unfortunately there's some in the GOP who would love to help them...

[Lancey Howard]

There's some frightening things in the wind.

[Lancey Howard]

P.S. I have no doubt that the socialist "mainstream" newsrooms will do whatever they can to help any effort to regulate the internet.

[Eddie01]

Bing is... "just really interested in making this country better" and is willing to pay 140,000 one hundred dollar bills to do it. ... to one party.

[goldstategop]

I guess it all depends on who gets the money. Then you'll see the Democrats toss CFR out the window faster than you'll throw your underwear in the washer.

(Denny Crane: "I Don't Want To Socialize With A Pinko Liberal Democrat Commie.Say What You Like About Republicans. We Stick To Our Convictions. Even When We Know We're Dead Wrong.")

[cricket]

"Bing is not a lobbyist and is not seeking any favors from Democrats." Sen. Barbara Boxer explained that Bing is "just really interested in making this country better."

No road takes us faster to hell, than the one paved by the collective and reason-impaired, will-to-power, mind-set of 'the Left'.

Historical paradigms are not enough. . .cultural blood-lettings not enough; generations of lives wasted for the empowerment of the self-chosen; not enough; and the price paid for our Freedoms, still not enough, for them to see that the axioms they hold dear, are rooted in an 'anti'. . .inauthentic, false-is-true/hell-is-heaven, nether/parallel world;

(I would not trust O'Reilly with this one. . .but Rush or Sean, should take this on)

[leadpenny]

Sen. Barbara Boxer explained that Bing is "just really interested in making this country better."

There ya go. Game - Set - Match. What's really sad is that she probably believes her own BS.

[sauropod]

This is not good. Kinda akin to letting Terry McAuliffe attend Columbia Land board meetings.

"Well, he just wants to make the country better." /s

[OpusatFR]

This is the totally frightening statement of the whole piece:

"...that whatever Congress does not specifically exempt from regulation should be regulated."

[gridlock]

Well, it's not like the First Amendment has anything to do with political speech. It's all about flinging condoms in church, pasties on strippers and taking "Under God" out of the Pledge of Allegiance.

[Puddleglum]

This shows how important it is to have Supremem Court judges who know the Constiution. I am shocked by how insidious the effort to regulate free speech is becoming.

[purpleland]

"In California, 'progressive' thinking has progressed to the idea that because money in politics is bad, political competition is, too."

No, "progressive thinking" does not honestly hold to the belief that money is bad in politics. "Progressive thinkers" and other ill-liberals preach that money is bad to disarm and disparage the political opposition. Also, ploying a little hyped-up mantra to gain sympathy in soliciting donations. Hypocritical leftist partisanship spinning as usual.

Why is every leftist/"liberal" anti-capitalist socialist I've known for the past 50 years is a wealthy capitalist??? Paradox!

[purpleland]

I forgot to say

M E R R Y
C H R I S T M A S ,
J I M ~~~ and to your family ~~~

[Red Reader]

....
Attacks on freedom of political speech are becoming more brazen. Because the attackers aim to enlarge government's control of the political campaigns that decide who controls government, the attacks advance liberalism's program of extending government supervision of life.
....
Usually, I like George Will. But, he is the same guy who just a couple of weeks ago railed against Intelligent Design and approves of government control when it comes to ID in the classroom. So, when "free speech" is under attack, I guess it depends on whose ox is getting gored.