Replies

It WAS a cheap shot, Laz. I didn't think that of you. So here is the context. Thanks for trying the humiliation game and being so sweet about it.

I honestly thought that GW was a step above the "normal" politician

Do you realize what this bill actually says? Do you realize that they did an end around the dems by including language, while not specific to unions includes them nevertheless? Do you realize that the bill raises the amount of hard money donations from individuals? Where are the dems going to find that in the ghettos they've created? Do you know that this bill will give us everything WE have been asking for, and no SC will brook the silencing of challengers to incumbents. Get a grip. You are being emotional beyond justification. I think the problem is that you've bought the Bush=dummy thing. What does that say about you?
I belong to the NRA. Do you really think this will stop us from backing pro-Second Amendment candidates and trashing anti-gunners every time they raise their ugly heads? What will this bill stop YOU from doing that you already do? Would it stop an Angelwood or kristinn? Would it stop the demonstrations and freeps anywhere? Would it have stopped the exposure of corruption in Florida? Do you realize that this bill calls for immediate disclosure of donations from anyone TO anyone, something we don't have now??? Gahhhh!

213 posted on 3/27/02 10:49 AM Eastern by Nix 2

To: Nix 2

BS. Most candidates who are anti-gunners are proud of it. It wouldn't be a slur to them to name them. Get a grip.

Uh, if the them you are reffering to are incumbents, and you're talking about the NRA, they specifically can't name them in any meaningful way 60 days before an election.

268 posted on 3/27/02 11:06 AM Eastern by

To: Nix 2

Naming them in a paid advertisement, as a slur or not, will be illegal thanks to this bill. Get it now?

279 posted on 3/27/02 11:10 AM Eastern

That part of this so-called bill will be gone long before then. No court would let that blatant attack on free speech stand.

289 posted on 3/27/02 11:14 AM Eastern by Nix 2

To: Nix 2

"The NRA will be gagged from talking about a given candidates voting record on guns, 60 days prior to an election."

BS.

I suggest you read the bill. You are uninformed.

Luckily the leadership of the NRA has read it. That is why the Executive Vice President, Wayne LaPierre, has vowed to challenge CFR in the courts.

380 posted on 3/27/02 11:35 AM Eastern by Lazamataz

To: Lazamataz

Luckily the leadership of the NRA has read it.

Read my post, Laz. I said the NRA would not be stopped by this bill. I didn't mention them specifically for no reason. Maybe you have me confused with the airheads stinking up the place with all that hot air.

408 posted on 3/27/02 11:46 AM Eastern by Nix 2

Another poster
Not to make light of your comment...but a question. Is that the *only* impact CFR will have? Or are there more concerns?

It is the most striking concern. I haven't paid attention to the other effects since this one screams at me, "Unconstitutional! Unconstitutional! Unconstitutional!!!!!!"

464 posted on 3/27/02 12:02 PM Eastern by Lazamataz

To: Lazamataz

"Unconstitutional! Unconstitutional! Unconstitutional!!!!!!"

Will be struck down! Will be struck down! Will be struck down!!!!!! We are the first off the mark, but by no means the last. This is on a fast track, Laz...at Bush's behest.

519 posted on 3/27/02 12:28 PM Eastern by Nix 2