Supreme Court Handing Down Ruling in Campaign Finance Reform (main parts upheld)

FOX News | 10 Dec 2003 | FOX News

[July 4th]

Reports that main portions of McCain-Feingold are now being upheld! People currently wading through a decision of over 300 pages.

[vbmoneyspender]

I don't think he is familiar with the 1st Amendment -- you might want to quote its language back to him.

[Timesink]

I think it's pretty safe to say that the GOP majority in the house and senate will be gone by 2006. They don't deserve they power we trusted them with.

If we vote them out in a fit of single-issue petulance, then we will deserve a RAT majority we get. A RAT majority that will match the current hard-socialist-left makeup of that party, not the '90s centrist Bill Clinton version. Enjoy, if that's what you want!

[John Jorsett]

Actually two of the Justices who probably voted for the ad bans, Ginsburg and Breyer, were appointed by Clinton. Are you going to let Dean appoint two more Justices like those two?

They only got to rule because Bush signed this monstrosity in the first place. If he's not going to veto bad legislation, he's not of much use.

[Orangedog]

And you can expect the Court will be slammed for it. Remember, the ACLU, Planned Parenthood, NRA, AARP...were all in the same side on this one.

Yeah, that will accomplish a lot [/sarcasm]. The robed thugs just made the 1st amendment conditional upon what the date is....and there isn't a damned thing that will be done about it!

[jwalsh07]

A 5-4 decision with that bitch O'Connor crapping on the Constitution again.

[Dane]

The only "ads" leading up to an election will be the columns and editorials in the NYTimes, USA Today, etc.

And FR and the internet and talk radio. Television viewing and newspaper circulation is going down, while talk radio and the internet usage for information is soaring.

[js1138]

The court also upheld restrictions on political ads in the weeks before an election. The television and radio ads often feature harsh attacks by one politician against another or by groups running commercials against candidates.

This part of the law will not last. On one side, the press gets to say anything it wants. On the other side, the president gets to manipulate the news for 60 days prior to the election.

That means that Bush gets two shots at presidential election -- his own reelection, and the election of his successor.

I suspect there will be widespread support for eliminating the 60 day rule after 2004.

[justshutupandtakeit]

You realize, I hope, that the founders DID NOT campaign nor run ads attacking their opponents. Maybe we should return to their standards of holding elections rather than assault the airwaves with fraudulent claims and lies. I can barely stand to watch tv during the election season because of them. Most of the fraudulent lies are from RATS so this might help.

[Judith Anne]

Like you, I'm withholding judgement. This is an AP story spun from a liberal angle, and I'm not going to get upset until I see what shakes out.

I'm sure the dems would love to see us screaming at President Bush over this ruling, but frankly, three hundred pages does not lend itself to instant analysis and condemnation.

[MEG33]

Because you hate the alternative?

[the gillman@blacklagoon.com]

Single issue?

It's pretty much every issue, from gun control to border control to now, speech control.

[Atlas Sneezed]

And people think it's not important for Bush to be reelected?

---

Why, so he can sign more unconstitutional legislation that infringes our liberties?

That's like saying we need firemen/arsonists around so that someone can put out the fires they start.

[justshutupandtakeit]

Go back to Mars.

[GeronL]

We still need to agitate to get the law REPEALED, however.

Maybe if we had a Republican Congress and a Republican President??? /sarcasm

[spunkets]

" If political free speech is not protected, what is?

The political power of the communists.

[ArneFufkin]

Pull your pants up Gillman. There are outsiders watching this.

[jwalsh07]

Dane, you can't possibly suppport this decision. 5 justice pissing on America, the Constitution and us is not worthy of even a modicum of support. They should be shunned.

[CasearianDaoist]

Of couse they did.

[Stultis]

Per an early AP report: "The court also upheld restrictions on political ads in the weeks before an election."

Unfreaking Believable!

Supreme Court Upholds 'Soft Money' Limits (first AP report on McCain-Feingold)

[July 4th]

The only thing left for them to do is pressure Congress. It's Congress' law, and they can change it.