Skip to comments.
Socialists Party donor reporting requirements exempted (again).
Chuch Muth's News and Views ^
| 4-6-03
| Chuch Muth
Posted on 04/06/2003 6:41:40 PM PDT by Kudsman
Some More Equal Than Others
On Thursday, the Federal Elections Commission extended an additional six-year exemption to the Socialist Workers Party which allows them to keep the names of their donors secret. The commies are the only political party in the country that continue to enjoy being able to play politics under this different set of rules from everybody else
(Excerpt) Read more at chuckmuth.com ...
TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Extended News; Government; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: bewaretheredmenace; commies; communism; communists; communistsubversion; donations; donors; electionlaw; elections; fec; government; marxists; mccarthywasright; redmenace; secretcontributions; socialist; socialistparty; socialists
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-38 last
To: EternalVigilance
I agree. But then there shouldn't be any restrictions on any of the parties, instead of giving preferential treatment to some.
To: mj1234
Yeah, I remember the rally. I used to live in MN, glad I don't now! Only difference between a demonrat & a socialist is that socialist are out in the open with their agenda & demonrat's agenda is hidden in the shadows.
Lately though, the demonrats are more open in their socialist agenda from what I have seen.
22
posted on
04/06/2003 9:32:20 PM PDT
by
Teetop
(democrats....... socialist.........whats the difference?)
To: mj1234
23
posted on
04/06/2003 9:36:29 PM PDT
by
weegee
(McCarthy was right, fight the Red Menace.)
To: steplock
"The exemption was first granted by a court in 1979 and last renewed by the commission in 1996." Carter and Clinton...why am I not surprised?
24
posted on
04/06/2003 9:40:44 PM PDT
by
rvoitier
To: Teetop
The Rats
have to court the socialist/communist vote; it drains too much from their party.
The Green Party gave them competition in a way that they couldn't fight with the "racist/sexist/rich whit guy" approach. The best they could do is "you're only helping the Republican candidate".
One look at the Palm Beach Ballot makes it clear why they want the socialist vote (look at all of the presidential commie candidates):
25
posted on
04/06/2003 9:43:27 PM PDT
by
weegee
(McCarthy was right, fight the Red Menace.)
To: weegee
LOL!
True, true.....I agree totally.
26
posted on
04/06/2003 9:48:28 PM PDT
by
Teetop
(democrats....... socialist.........whats the difference?)
To: Kudsman
Remember, this is the political party of VT Congressman Bernie Sanders. IIRC, he was a presidential elector for the SWP in 1976. He uses for offical and media purposes, the term "independent" to hide his twisted agenda.
27
posted on
04/06/2003 10:01:32 PM PDT
by
Mr. Morals
(Long live a free Iraqi people!)
To: steplock
The partys recent request for extension of this protection cites 74 examples of harassment and threats--all since the previous extension was granted in 1996--directed at supporters of the Socialist Workers Party by right-wing individuals and groups, employers, and city, state, and federal police. It includes corroborating newspaper clippings, police reports, citations, and individual declarationsUsing this as the criteria, the names of donors to the RNC and DNC could be kept secret as well.
Just who the hell is running the FEC anyway?.
28
posted on
04/06/2003 10:05:46 PM PDT
by
Rome2000
To: Mr. Morals
Isn't Socialist Worker the Trotskiite party?
Socialist was Norman Thomas's party and Socialist Labor is allied with the English (Blair) Labour Party.
29
posted on
04/06/2003 10:07:58 PM PDT
by
Doctor Stochastic
(Vegetabilisch = chaotisch is der Charakter der Modernen. - Friedrich Schlegel)
To: Teetop
Another thing to ask in this case is why don't the other communist/socialist parties need to seek this same sort of protection from harassment?
30
posted on
04/06/2003 10:31:29 PM PDT
by
weegee
(McCarthy was right, fight the Red Menace.)
To: *Communist Subversion; Republican_Strategist
To find all articles tagged or indexed using Communist Subversion, click below: |
|
click here >>> |
Communist Subversion |
<<< click here |
|
(To view all FR Bump Lists, click here) |
31
posted on
04/07/2003 12:01:44 AM PDT
by
weegee
(McCarthy was right, fight the Red Menace.)
To: Kudsman
Just how does one enforce anticipate the "Campaign Finance Reform" laws will be enforced in the case of this political party?
Which leads to an interesting potential strategy.
What if some 500,000 conservatives were to switch political alegiance to become registered Socialists. And then, what if they were to usurp the platform of this party. And then, what if they were to begin to use the Socialist Workers Party as the platform to launch their conservative agenda, as well as attacks on the liberal left.
Would this exemption still be allowed, or would the Democrat party suddenly become outraged?
To: Reactionary
Incredible!
To: Rome2000
I sent this out to the Arkansas dimocrat legislators - Biy have I received a BUNCH of "remove me from your mailing list!"
I found ONE of the reasons behind the legislation - With this excemption, can TOTAL SECRECY be far behind for the ruling party in Arkansas?
WHY did Arkansas Legalize Communism?
Date Sunday, April 06 @ 19:42:06
War on Terror
Why was there an EMERGENCY CLAUSE to make sure subversive organizations could establish themselves in the Arkansas Banana Republik?
I found PART of the answer from the Federal Elections Committee:
Socialist Workers Party gets FEC exemption on revealing donors
etc.etc.etc. I do respond back to those legislators reminding them that they ARE public officials and they work for US! Their email is public and they will get mailed!
34
posted on
04/07/2003 8:11:22 AM PDT
by
steplock
( http://www.spadata.com)
BUMP
35
posted on
04/07/2003 8:44:29 AM PDT
by
weegee
(McCarthy was right, fight the Red Menace.)
To: steplock
"the U.S. Supreme Court recognized that for particular parties, "the threat to the exercise of First Amendment rights is so serious...that the Act's requirements cannot be constitutionally applied."So, I guess some of us are more equal than others. Typical liberal socialist bullshit from the USSC.
Either the Act is Constitutional or not. Who the hell are they to dictate that the law shall be unequally applied?
36
posted on
04/07/2003 8:52:39 AM PDT
by
wcbtinman
(Not from 'my cold dead hands', but from your's.)
To: EternalVigilance
Personally, I think most of the restrictions placed on political activity by the Congress and the F.E.C. are unconstitutionalWhat if I wanted to know who is funding my adversaries so I could boycott their business/products? Am I not entitled to know whom my enemies are? Even more dangerous is who is the Socialists Party donating to? If they are receiving foreign donations and then turning around and funding closeted commies I sure would like to know who they are.
37
posted on
04/07/2003 12:44:07 PM PDT
by
Kudsman
(LETS GET IT ON!!! The price of freedom is vigilance. Tyranny is free of charge.)
To: Kudsman
Thank you for posting this.
Truly sickening. I must confess ignorance as to who appoints the FEC officials. I'm trying to determine the most effective way to FReep this, or is it simply too late?
38
posted on
04/07/2003 2:30:02 PM PDT
by
djreece
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-38 last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson