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

No senators for President, any party, ever.
1 posted on 09/18/2006 11:06:31 PM PDT by quantim
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: quantim

Only idiots check that box on their tax returns.


2 posted on 09/18/2006 11:10:18 PM PDT by The Old Hoosier (Right makes might.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: quantim
No senators for President, any party, ever.

What about Sen. GOLDWATER ?

4 posted on 09/18/2006 11:14:08 PM PDT by staytrue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: quantim
How about someone run a smart campaign this time around? How about letting go the brain dead commercials that most everyone doesn't care about? How about coming up with a campaign that answers questions, that presents issues, and welcomes debate rather than running from any controversy?

Let's spend those millions upon millions not on empty television ads, but instead on getting the message out to those most interested - those who vote regularly. Actually fund GOTV programs. Real campaign appearances.
5 posted on 09/18/2006 11:19:50 PM PDT by kingu (No, I don't use sarcasm tags - it confuses people.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: quantim
No senators for President, any party, ever.

It was a disgrace that neither Kerry nor Edwards resigned from their offices while running for the top ticket in 2004.

Bob Dole had the grace to do so in 2000.

8 posted on 09/19/2006 12:50:53 AM PDT by glorgau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: quantim
More than ever, the first cut in the presidential sweepstakes will not result from the early contests of 2008, but from candidates' ability to stockpile huge amounts of money the previous year. That means potential candidates will ramp up their fundraising far sooner than they ever have in the past.
That assumes that "free media" - aka, journalism, aka "the driveby media" are objective and that the money journalism spends publishing newspapers and broadcasting is cleaner than they money you give to the candidates of your choice.

But the definition of "prejudice" - "a vagrant opinion with no visible means of support" - applies to that assumption. In truth the only "support" for the assumption that journalism publication is not political spending is the unsupported word of journalists. They say that they are objective. And on the basis alone of that fatuous, arrogant claim, candidates for office and their contributos are stripped of their First Amendment right to spend their own money publishing their own opinions up to the limits of their purses.

And if that says that George Soros can spend a billion dollars on a campaign, I'm sorry - but that is the implication of the Constitution, and journalism is already contributing that much to the Democratic Party in free advertising every two years. In fact, George Soros boasted that he had bought passage of McCain-Feingold.

It's not true that journalism is in the pocket of the Democratic Party. Actually, it's the other way around. May seem like a distinction without a difference, but IMHO that has significant implications which should be seriously considered.

The 'Media Party' is over (Howard Fineman)


10 posted on 09/19/2006 2:40:13 AM PDT by conservatism_IS_compassion (The idea around which liberalism coheres is that NOTHING actually matters except PR.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: quantim

It broke? I wonder why? Then give the money back. We don't want you using on nice little getaways, home repairs etc. like you do with our tax dollars. In other words, we are tired of you living the good life with free benefits such as medical etc and flaunting it in our faces and even including the government employees in on this. We are tired of supporting all of you to run around and purposely never get anything done in the true interest of the public so you can freely pursue your own private and selfish agendas instead of what you were actually elected to do. We are tired of you and yours(your family, employees and friends) getting rich off of our backs.

We hope you don't mind; but we have decided to unelect you, your family and your employees and try to get our forced investment in you back. Maybe you can start living like the rest of us. Oh, what was that? It will never happen.

YOU WANNA MAKE A BET??????


11 posted on 09/19/2006 3:05:37 AM PDT by freekitty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: quantim
No one represents the crossroads of presidential ambition and campaign finance activism more than McCain. His name is synonymous with tough election laws that have banned parties from collecting unrestricted and unlimited amounts of money.

HA!

The Indian Giving Loophole

Or has Congress closed this gargantuan loophole in the last five years?

12 posted on 09/19/2006 3:07:11 AM PDT by mewzilla (Property must be secured or liberty cannot exist. John Adams)
[ 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