What do FReepers think of GWB signing "Campaign Reform"?

03-21-06 | retread antifreeper troll zotted

[Jim Robinson]

If you're really interested in this particular troll's opinions, Google Todd Brendan Fahey.

[xzins]

What worries me is the basis for signing it?

1. Was it political expediency, and he knew it was constitutionally wrong?

2. Was it political expediency, and he did not know it to be wrong.

It seems that the Supremes upheld it, but the Supremes were off the reservation when O'Connor was in the mix. Perhaps they are better now than they were then. Time will tell.

But the rationale for limiting speech as I understand it, is almost a dictatorship of the proletariat type of issue. The liberals (socialists) say: Some people are more powerful than others. These people have access to all of the free speech. The lesser folks (us) are oppressed by virtue of our limited access to power. In order to balance this inequity, the enlightened ruling class (our big brothers) must be able to restrict "free speech of the powerful" in order that the powerless have access to their right of free speech.

Free speech, so they say, must be limited, and it must be placed in our big brothers' hands so us little people truly to have free speech.

To which all thinking people say bullsh_t.

One has to wonder why that law was signed. I can't believe that Pres. Bush bought into the above argument. Therefore, I'm left thinking he did it for political expediency knowing it to be wrong.

[Bahbah]

Hah, busted :)

[endthematrix]

HA! (My peepers are getting tired)

[Godebert]

"A better question is pro1stamendment pro2ndamendment?"

Agreed. That is usually the best indicator as to a person's political leanings, although there are plenty of anti-gun types on this forum who label themselves as "Conservatives".

They usually are the ones who are rabid in their support of Giulliani and/or McCain.

[EternalVigilance]

Back when he signed it, most of us on this forum though it was safe for him to sign it because it would never pass constitutional muster with the supreme court.

Bah. I don't believe 'MOST of us' did. I believe MOST thought it was absolutely the wrong thing to do. MOST didn't care much for the executive passing off his duty to interpret the Constitution in its clear wording to a panel of robed rulers.

[durasell]

Thanks...explains a lot.

[EternalVigilance]

LOL...

[durasell]

Yes, when I think too long about the 2nd and 1st Amendments, I soon combine them in thanks for the 21st...

[Godebert]

"One has to wonder why that law was signed. I can't believe that Pres. Bush bought into the above argument. Therefore, I'm left thinking he did it for political expediency knowing it to be wrong."

President Bush stated that he thought that it (CFR) was unConstitutional. He signed it anyway. Therefore he put political expediency above his oath of office to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States of America.

[EternalVigilance]

He's a troll gleefully watching dissent.

Let him.

Conservatives are interested in the truth, no matter whose ox is being gored.

The truth to a Leftist is like holy water to Count Dracula.

[Northern Yankee]

Should never have signed it.

What galls me is that President Bush had hoped that the courts would have found it unconstitutional.

I love President Bush, but this is one executive decision that he blew.

[Jim Robinson]

I think most of us were damned pissed:

http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/poll?poll=2;results=1

And were praying the SCOTUS would toss it out:

http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/poll?poll=4;results=1

But suspected it would not seriously damage the president's chances:

http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/poll?poll=3;results=1

[EternalVigilance]

Thanks for vindicating my memory!

[mkjessup]

Hey Jim, is this the guy?(heh! heh!)

[fortheDeclaration]

One of the few decisions that I have disagreed with the President over.

But even Washington and Lincoln made mistakes.

[EternalVigilance]

FReepers are usually a pretty prescient bunch!


prescient
adj : perceiving the significance of events before they occur;
"extroardinarily prescient memoranda on the probable
course of postwar relations"-R.H.Rovere


Source: Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913)

Prescient \Pre"sci*ent\ (pr[=e]"sh[i^]*ent or -shent), a. [L.
praesciens, -entis, p. pr. of praescire to foreknow; prae
before + scire to know: cf. F. prescient. See Science.]
Having knowledge of coming events; foreseeing; conscious
beforehand. --Pope.

Henry . . . had shown himself sensible, and almost
prescient, of this event. --Bacon.



:-)

[MadIvan]

I can summarise my feelings thus:

Regards, Ivan

[EternalVigilance]

Hey, you signed up a year after I did, to the day!

:-)

[frankjr]

Your mama likes me...in a dirty way.