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.

[Howlin]

ROFLMAO. Now come clean off my monitor!

[PSYCHO-FREEP]

Well I guess that fear will be quickly countered by conservatives going after DU! Our case against them would be far stronger in regards to hate!

[Protagoras]

No you don't.

Untrue. You have absolutely no basis for saying that except your hatred of people who expose posters like you for what you are.

Have a nice day, pinhead.

[Dane]

Just because the media do not always get what they want doesn't mean they aren't influential and don't help shape the perceptions of millions of people

Without the internet do you think that the California recall would have happened.

[unixfox]

[hellinahandcart]

You are so right! A good ad guy can make an impression -- that means Bush needs to hire one.

Yep. Too bad *I* am not able to hire one anymore, if my timing is off and I haven't jumped through the proper hoops.

This decision means that money will have a greater influence over the election process than ever.

But hey, I can still type whatever I want on the internet. America is hanging on my every word. It'll be okay.

[jeremiah]

What good would it do to have a conservative television station, they would put out news from a more balanced viewpoint for sure, but the voter that watches only for entertainment, will not see anything but what the established media puts out. No ads to disrupt their mindless channel surfing, just programming designed by Oprah.

[Steve_Seattle]

"How is this restriction any different than those preventing electioneering within 100 yards of the polling places?"

I think there is a huge difference. Electioneering at a polling place can be viewed as intimidation in a very immediate sense; if you had to run through a gauntlet of political signs and pamphleteers to get to a polling place, many people simply wouldn't go - it would either frighten or annoy them. Also, when electioneering goes on at or near a polling place, it raises questions of collusion between poll-workers and partisan political activists.

[Howlin]

I wondered about that very ad.

I loved it!

[Dane]

Pinging you as I have a fear now.

And I guess you are in the fetal position sucking your thumb.

[justshutupandtakeit]

There will be nothing in that book which contradicts what I said. Did candidates travel all over the country campaigning for themselves? NO. Did they run campaign ads? NO. Did they pretend to be above the fray and to be indifferent to their election? YES. Adams was the same way. PS. A better biography by a professional historian as opposed to a reporter is Page Smith's.

[ThinkDifferent]

Us BUSHBOTS just won a serious victory over Soros and his Commie ilk.

Sorry, even if this law does help Republicans (doubtful, you think the socialists will obey it?), that doesn't justify eviscerating the 1st Amendment.

[Sabertooth]

* CFR restrictcs the flow of information about those politicians at the time we elect them.

**How? .. please explain in detail so that I can understand your point

The point of just about all campaign campaign finance "reforms" is to restrict contributions, and to restrict campaign spending. The whole "get the money out of politics" shtick.

This bill does more of the same.

It costs money to get information to the public. That's why advertising is such a big business.

Laws restricting the money necessary to transmit information necessarily restrict the transmission of information.

I'm a consumer of information. In this instance, I'm a consumer of political information. If I contribute to a candidate, I'm also a participant in the production of information.

Restrictions on spending and contributions therefore restrict my ability to consume and produce information.

The hair-splitting about restrictions on groups vs. individuals doesn't bear scrutiny. Groups are made up of individuals. Restrictions on groups are restrictions on individuals.

[Howlin]

Without the internet do you think that the California recall would have happened.

How about 2000?

[July 4th]

BCRA suppresses independent nonparty groups that refer to an identifiable federal candidate within 30 days of a primary or 60 days of a general election. In many cases, these "groups" are individuals.

"In a nutshell, the ads say that people who feel strongly about an issue cannot jointly buy an ad on television to share their opinions and to note that one candidate or another better represents their views." click

[JustAnAmerican]

" Yep they did a great job in protecting Grey Davis didn't they.

LOL, you can't be serious? Care to tell me what 60 day (no political ads) limit was in effect during davis's recall? Bush should be held accountable for this, he did not have to sign this garbage.I am getting pretty sick and tired of the folks who think Bush can do no wrong or the "we have to take some bad with the good" garbage.

People would do well to remember the Louisiana election cycle, lots of folks will not be voting in the Presidental election this cycle. Ahh well methinks revolution is just around the corner in this country.

[Mo1]

I loved it!

Got to admit, it was a good ad and they just went ape over it

[aristeides]

Incumbent protection is the name of the game.

[Beck_isright]

Yes, but since FR is INSIDE THE 9TH CIRCUIT an injuction forcing FR down could be filed and granted quite rapidly. In the more conservative courts it will be harder to do. I've pinged Jim because I have a fear that we could see FR die. Remember what everyone wished for with this law. When these pages say HTTP: 404 Item not Found remember what those who were in favor of this law wanted. What will happen is the broad interpretations of this law will allow the liberal courts to selectively silence talk radio, the internet, and on television. Have a nice day.

[Moby Grape]

"The hair-splitting about restrictions on groups vs. individuals doesn't bear scrutiny. Groups are made up of individuals. Restrictions on groups are restrictions on individuals."

Well said.

Rush just said, "If you think this does not effect you, you are wrong."