NO on Prop. 89.
To: FairOpinion
At least two other major sources of campaign cash — attorneys who represent plaintiffs and wealthy Indian tribes — could continue spending unlimited amounts for and against propositions.I bet it has a labor union exception, too. Our CFR in colorado limits everyone except labor unions and trial lawyers. It's an abomination and CO will be a commie state after this election.
To: FairOpinion
TORT REFORM!!
To: FairOpinion
This is a Democrat election then protection act. It's absurd.
4 posted on
09/26/2006 6:39:31 PM PDT by
Jaysun
(Idiot Muslims. They're just dying to have sex orgies.)
To: FairOpinion
At least two other major sources of campaign cash — attorneys who represent plaintiffs and wealthy Indian tribes — could continue spending unlimited amounts for and against propositions.Well, that seems fair.
Feh!
FMCDH(BITS)
5 posted on
09/26/2006 7:04:55 PM PDT by
nothingnew
(I fear for my Republic due to marxist influence in our government. Open eyes/see)
To: FairOpinion
That sort of measure is clearly unconsitutional under the equal rights section of the XIVth Amendment. I think that it should be fought by every means possible, including civil disobedience.
I would set up non-partisan commissions to publicize just which propositions are funded by the trial lawyers, and publicize this without restraint. I would pin the label of "lawyers' prostitute" on every politician who supports this measure.
No holds barred on this one!
6 posted on
09/26/2006 7:24:58 PM PDT by
docbnj
To: FairOpinion
Just say NO!
Props 1B, 1C, 1D, 1E, 84, 86, 87, 88 and 89.
8 posted on
09/26/2006 8:21:35 PM PDT by
Amerigomag
(ral)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson