Replies

I am hearing Justice Starr right now on cspan-2, and the team fighting CFR ... I am very pleased that he is making clear and convincing argument against individual contribution limits.

... "procrustean limits" ... I am hearing alot of convincing arguments (to me) about many many parts of the bill. soft money ban to parties will funnel and create "K-street" entities. many references to buckley v. valeo. issue ads are protected.

mentions that bill forbids TV ads, but not direct mail of the same content/type!!! what a nutty bill.

I am sure the McConnell team will do fine, and I agree with those who have pointed out that this is an actual court case, not something where we have to wait for the spineless RINOS in the Senate to convict. Ken Starr's addition to the team will give the RATS some fuel, but who the hell in the general public cares...in fact, one of our best arguments against the bill all along is that no one in the general public gives a flying f***k. Polls that ask people to list their priorities show that people consistently list CFR at the very bottom...will they care about Terry McAuliffe rehashing Starr attacks on Hardball? It doesn't matter in the eyes of the court. The best strategy here is to assemble the best legal team available...as has been pointed out, Starr is a fantastic constitutional attorney. McConnell knows what he is doing on this front, it is his signature issue

I am hearing Justice Starr right now on cspan-2, and the team fighting CFR

I am very encouraged by the fact that McConnell had all this 'high-priced help' together this afternoon. Only Sullivan sent a message because she was in California. They are hot to argue this! I heard one of them actually articulate my bottom line/rubicon: - If we have to put up with vulgarity and pornography in the name of the First Amendment, then we cannot possibly be denied the freedom of political speech. The framers wrote the First Amendment FOR political speech!