Posted on 10/11/2010 9:43:56 AM PDT by mandaladon
With the present system, they are robbing you just the same. It is called corruption.
So you’d replace it with something at least equally bad, if not worse. Thanks, but no thanks.
Hear, hear!!
They have a lot of multi-tasking to do.
And you know the socialist are going to be acting like...
just think of every evil, deceitful, plotting, bribing, setting people up..
everything you can imagine...the socialist will have their paid actors,
paid hit men doing along with whatever they can do to keep the economy in the tank to get people back in their clutches next election.
They have already said as much.
Obama: Hand to hand combat.
Biden: Playing hell.
as Democrats and liberals attack the Chamber of Commerce and independent spending groups in an attempt to stop businesses from participating in politics
So I would have to finance the elections of politicians whom I despise?
No thanks. I’d rather stick with “bribery.”
“in an attempt to stop businesses from participating in politics.”
But have no problem with entertainers interfering.
I’d say,
when the government cannot effect “businesses”,
then the businesses should stop participating in politics.
Conversely, the “government” has no authority to stop any entity that is affected by gov’t policy from having a say in that government.
“The MSM must be universally boycotted by conservatives and Republicans until it regains at least a semblence of objectivity.”
Boycott their advertisers and write to them letting them know why you are not buying their products anymore.
Could this be described as the Hussein dictatorship?
Could this be described as the Hussein wannabe dictatorship?
The objective would be to find something better. That is actually a good point you make, though, and may be a point against it. Could we trust those in power to come up with a good system.
I only state the obvious. The present system is very, very corrupt and costing our country trillions.
How about trying an answer to the question in post 11. I understand your feelings on the subject and yes it is a difficult one to sort out public financing.
But do let me know how you would vote as the question is put to you in post 11.
Actuall it's not difficult at all. Here's the proper way to frame the question: "Is 'public' financing of political campaigns for Federal office authorized by Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution?"
A quick read of the Article and Section in question reveals the answer to be not just "no", but "HELL NO". Therefore 'public' financing of political campaigns is an un-Constitutional abomination.
Best,
L
Just one more reason to vote against every Rat - even if he is your next door neighbor, or, as I hear all too often from so called conservatives ‘I’ve always kinda liked old so and so.’
You can’t fall into the ‘my rep, mayor, dog catcher isn’t so bad’. Their power to wreck and destroy comes from their sheer numbers and we need them all gone.
You are going to make me go look up Article 1, Section 8. Do the classes at FR never stop! OK, going there and will be back.
Absolutely! Obama and his gang make Nixon and company look like choir boys.
The purpose of history is to bring about the thesis' defeat of the antithesis. Anything that helps this along is good, anything that hinders it is bad.
Public financing is a very bad idea. The MSM can trash our side daily and we can only respond with the money given to us by government. No thanks, my free speech will not be limited.
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.