Posted on 09/21/2007 11:33:22 AM PDT by pissant
Gotta craft a message not to offend, I reckon...
The correct solution, of course, is to have full disclosure of all money sources, down to an identifiable person or legitimate business entity.
Then, if the pol bestows special favors, his opponent in the next election can use it to get him booted.
The author is on Romney’s staff. Just another hit piece. Too bad its not working, with Mitt now in the single digits in many states.
Thompson supported something he thought was a good idea at the time, and changed his mind after he saw that it didn’t work as intended. And the whole bill was written in the first place to combat Clintonian tactics.
And that excuses him from banning independent ads within 60 days of an election? ANd then defending that to the Supreme Court?
Can't say, but being in support of one candidate, while generating information that would put another candidate in a bad light, is a surefire way to get your words ignored and labeled as someone who is biased, and has an agenda.
But, just like fredheads attacks on Mitt and Rudy, etc, it cannot be dismissed out of hand. Just because someone does not like you, does not mean they are always wrong. On this one, he’s dead nuts on.
Nope.
Being in support of one candidate, while generating information that would put another candidate in a bad light, is a surefire way to get your words ignored and labeled as someone who is biased, and has an agenda.
You are most welcome, please come and visit us again.
I didn't dismiss his comments out of hand, and stated that Fred would have to take his lumps for anything he has done wrong.
If "Fredheads" who are actively a part of Fred's candidacy generate things about Mitt and Rudy, I would certainly expect them to also take any lumps coming to them.
I always try to determine whether the poster is just a regular Joe/Jane, pumped up on his candidate, or a paid supporter of the candidate.
The first type poster might (or might not) change his mind about who he supports, as information is posted, reviewed, tested, verified, etc., on FR.
But I don't think the other type poster will, as long as the paycheck continues.
On this one, he’s dead nuts on.
Perhaps. I have, and will continue to read many posts on FR as the various factions maneuver for position in the Republican primary. Some of it turns out to apparently be true, some partly true, some blatantly false, or twisted to fit an agenda.
I suspect that we would agree that the FR readers will determine for themselves whether it is dead on. LOL, I'll skip the anatomical reference in my response.
Lets face it, almost all CFR laws should be titled incumbent protection laws. The House and the Senate are mainly populated by career politicians and they are not going to pass any laws that put their careers at risk. Most “real” conservatives want more discussion because we think we can win the battle of ideas. Opening up limits, but with full and timely disclosure of where the funds came from is the best way to go.
This is just another chink in Fred’s armor and another reason why he will not excite the “conservative” base. He can’t motivate the RR base either. Therefore, he can’t win the election.
Even though interest groups are precluded from advertising within a certain time frame before an election, individuals can still express their opinions any time they want. Even as late as the day of the election, folks can stand the requisite distance from the polling place, holding a sign promoting their candidate for all to see on the way in to vote.
Actually,
He did say that. He also stated that the law did not work as he intended it and maybe we should just go for immediate and public reporting of all campaign contributions.
Which is what Fred suggested just recently.
James Bopp, Jr. is a leading campaign finance litigator who serves as General Counsel for the James Madison Center for Free Speech in Terre Haute, Indiana. He also serves as Special Advisor for Life Issues for the Romney for President campaign.
Stop it. Only Romney isn’t allowed to ever change his position. Thompson can change his mind all he wants.
After all, he’s an actor, so maybe he was just playing the part of being McCain’s biggest supporter.
You don’t think Duncan Hunter has any advisors on his team?
And if he does, you think it would be right for someone to ask what’s wrong with him in those areas that he has “advisors”?
For example, maybe a “foreign policy” advisor? Does that mean that candidates who have “foreign policy” advisors are suspect in that area?
Or are you just not aware that “life issues” means issues of interest to the pro-life community?
Why would they? Hunter’s no threat to Thompson. They are spending most of their energy attacking Romney.
Hunter has no advisors. Never has. He has a campaign manager, but that’s about it. Hunter is the guy others go to for advice.
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.