Not a good analogy on your part there.
I take it that you support Bushs descision to sign CFR. You have no reservations with regard to the language?
What did you think of my small businessman hypothetical situation from the other thread? How do you think CFR will effect the little guy that is not affiliated with a PAC/Party?
EBUCK
No, actually it served its purpose very well, it points out WHY we differ on this issue.
To me, what's going on in DC is a war, to you it isn't.
For years we've been complaining that the socialists defeat conservatives at nearly every turn, they do that because they void themselves of the obligation to observe any sort of pre-determined "rules of war" in this struggle.
Meanwhile, when conservatives take the offensive, a choir of well-meaning, but somewhat naive voices begin raising the question of whether we are following those "rules of war" in our campaign.
We are doomed to lose because we shackle ourselves.
I know that a lot will not agree with me on this and I will more than likely be flamed, and branded a Bushbot, and that's OK with me. It's a small price to pay for the right to freely speak my mind.
I believe that the signing of this bill into law is a solid, political move by the administration. The Supreme Court has ruled that money=free speech when it comes to political ads on two occasions not that long ago, I don't see them overturning previous rulings to give CFR legitimacy.
They will either strike it down, or send it back to congress to have the questionable portions removed. Either way, it's a set back for McCain and the Democrats.
I think that you keep missing the point, the "little guy" will in no way be affected.
If he can pay for a pro second amendment ad, he can do it. All he has to do is show that his $$$ did not come from a gun manufacturer.
Then again, I could be dead wrong.