The wheels are coming off the bus."
It's a beautiful thing!
Posted on 01/23/2010 3:53:56 AM PST by kinsman redeemer
That they were running ads before JD even announced is pretty telling. And exciting. :)
muslims do not wear ties... period... not believers.
LLS
Jim asked me not too! ;-)
LLS
Reconnect with his pissed-off base.
And who was it this week who said, “The first amendment is overrated”?
In the Federal system, I believe it is, but that’s why we have three branches of government—otherwise the court is incapable of being overruled. As the law (the Constitution in this case) currently stands, McCain-Feingold is incompatible and, therefore, overturned.
So, that means the legislature has to approve an amendment to the law that currently stands, and the President has to approve it.
Basic civics, obviously, and maybe too basic for this instance, but that’s the gist of it at least. I don’t see Obama or Congress amending the Constitution anytime soon.
They can’t even get their own people elected.
:-)!
LLS
It’s better than exciting. I can’t find words to express how jazzed I was last night listening to the stream of his last hour. I was on board with Marco Rubio last April and now I sense the same energy for a JD run from my friends in my adoptive home state.
Have already e-mailed JD a few times, including last night, that I eagerly await his notice on where to send contributions. I might even start a way to bundle (Money Bomb) for him.
I wonder how many of the Liberty 5 are going to have an “accident” so he can pack his Kangaroo Kourt?
If Barack Obama, Chuck U. Schumer or Nancy Pelosi are against something, I am for it. If they are for it, I am against it.
So easy.
This is great. I live in Massachusetts, and my buddy and I were out in the snow on Tuesday doing what we could to help:
We had agreed Tuesday night to get together last night to pop a champagne cork. After hearing of the Supreme Court decision, I called him and said, a la Chief Brody in Jaws: "We need a bigger bottle!"
I know a lot of people have a lot of issues with some of the things George W. Bush did as President, but his signing of McCain-Feingold was an absolute repudiation of his oath to protect the Constitution. His logic was that he would sign it and leave it up to SCOTUS to judge it unconstitutional.
I appreciate many things he did as President, but that was shameful. He had no business and no right to kick the can down the road and leave it up to the Supreme Court. This ruling was like taking a thorn out of my ideological ass. It grated on me every time I thought of it, which was often.
On the Mark Levin show, they had one of the plaintiffs in the case describing parts of the case examination by the Supreme Court. In one sequence, they had some FEC bureaucrat on the stand being grilled, and the question came up (and I paraphrase here):
JUSTICE GINSBERG: (being a "friendly" justice to the SEC hack): "Can you reiterate your stand again for us on whether the content by the plaintiff (in this case, an anti-Hillary DVD whose release was prohibited during the campaign time frame) would have been equally banned if it were a book instead of a DVD? We have a problem with book banning..." (this was said by Ginsberg to allow the FEC official to explain the FEC standing in a good light)
FEC BUREAUCRAT: (honestly) "Yes. If it were a book, yes, the promotion and release would have been prohibited. But really, even though the criminal law is there, trust me, nobody would have ever been prosecuted in that way."
JUSTICE ROBERTS: (Leaning forward, forehead furrowed): "Madam, we do not put our First Amendment rights at the mercy of FEC bureaucrats!"
WOOHOO! I almost went off the road cheering at that one!
There is a reason liberals are so bent out of shape over this ruling: They understand completely that this weakens the position of the media, which had unlimited resources to support liberal candidates, where conservatives had no such advantage, no recourse.
They know what they lost!
We had extra champagne for THAT one!
Obama is more worried about an inscription on a rifle sight than he is about national security or freedom of speech.
Go pound sand, Barry
When we said “Free Speech”, we didn’t mean for you. *sneer*
-your friends on the American Left
Their plan is obviously going to be to quickly pass another unconstitutional restriction on corporate free speech so that it will be in place before November and thereby make corporate free speech illegal for this election.
They know it will take another 3 years to get the new law before the Supreme Court again so they can thereby effectively overturn the Supreme Court until this issue is brought before them again.
They are probably hoping that Kennedy retires and can be replaced with another free-speech hating liberal.
The curious take on the first amendment among liberals is that it must be controlled so that it can be fair. I read this from some Feingold apologists a few years back. They say that the "little guy" needs the state to silence the "corporate voices" and also to be the voice of the little guy.
It boils down to "when the liberal state speaks that is the people's voice, and any other voice is the oppressor's voice."
Pure communist thought process. And also a way to do away with free speech.
Don't think that the rino's will not side with the socialists against the Scotus ruling. After all, it is MCCAIN/Feingold. McCain bought the logic above. So will Snowe, Collins, Voinovich, etc. They only need 2 to break a filibuster now.
I believe he had big foreign money.... money from muslim governments that built his campaign and promoted (the hell in) the man ,,,,, making his meteoric rise to power. Whats good for the goose, (him using (undisclosed) foreign big government money, is good for the gander! Even if its used to crater him. Fair is fair!
IMO
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.