On Mon, 19 Aug 2013 19:43:58 -0700, "Oglethorpe" <antikerry@go.com>
wrote:
>
>"F. Brown" <fredbrown@nowhere.com> wrote in message
>news:521256d1$0$32490$bb4e3ad8@newscene.com...
>>
>> "Oglethorpe" <antikerry@go.com> wrote in message
>> news:I_mdnYr7aO7M-YzPnZ2dnUVZ_qednZ2d@mchsi.com...
>>>
>>> "F. Brown" <fredbrown@nowhere.com> wrote in message
>>> news:5210c748$0$32476$bb4e3ad8@newscene.com...
>>>>
>>>> "Frank McCoy" <mccoyf@millcomm.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:se4v09pscsrdedo7dbmncjmtc3rvvg7iai@4ax.com...
>>>>> "F. Brown" <fredbrown@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>"Frank McCoy" <mccoyf@millcomm.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>news:96fqv850qadfaemhusjstdak0h5kedpb1t@4ax.com...
>>>>>>> Justin Thyme <abuse@localhost.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>On Sat, 3 Aug 2013 09:18:55 -0400, "F. Brown"
>>>>>>>><fredbrown@nowhere.com>
>>>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>I follow the Electronic Frontier Foundation and their battles
>>>>>>>>>against
>>>>>>>>>censorship
>>>>>>>>>and restrictions on free speech. Many of the appellate rulings they
>>>>>>>>>win
>>>>>>>>>contain the
>>>>>>>>>phrase, "would have a chilling effect on free speech." Makes me
>>>>>>>>>think
>>>>>>>>>that
>>>>>>>>>the
>>>>>>>>>appellate courts understand SCOTUS's position on free speech.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Seems to me that the Bush court has the view that free speach only
>>>>>>>>applies to corporations.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ... And government politicians ... Those belonging to the particular
>>>>>>> party in-power at the moment, of course.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Which is why the Citizens United decision infuriates them, although
>>>>>>they
>>>>>>incorrectly blame Citizens for lifting the monetary restrictions
>>>>>>imposed
>>>>>>by McCain-Feingold. Speech Now Org sued the FEC and won over those
>>>>>>restrictions. While Citizens was decided by SCOTUS, Speech Now
>>>>>>ended at the DC appellate court, the Justice Dept deciding not to
>>>>>>appeal.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Um ... I might point out that the ruling allowing unlimited monetary
>>>>> spending by corporations FAVORS by huge amounts the party and people
>>>>> in-power at the moment, and NOT those trying to kick the current SOB's
>>>>> out!
>>>>
>>>> You misunderstand the definition of a "corporation" as applied in
>>>> Citizens.
>>>> You and others see "corporations" as GM, AT&T, Microsoft etc, Political
>>>> Action Committes formed by individual voters like Citizens United
>>>> incorporate
>>>> for legal protection. If they don't incorporate the individual donors
>>>> would
>>>> most likely face SLAP suits by their political opponents in an attempt
>>>> to
>>>> silence them.
>>>> Big corporations like GM etc have always been able to donate directly
>>>> and
>>>> indirectly to political candidates. What they were prohibited from doing
>>>> was
>>>> engaging in "electioneering", paying for advertising directly advocating
>>>> for
>>>> or against a political candidate. This is known as "corporate
>>>> independent
>>>> expenditures", a form of political free speech which the government is
>>>> prohibited from restricting under the First Amendment.
>>>> Corporations, big and small, are comprised of individual investors,
>>>> share
>>>> holders, who while they may be members of a group still ahe the right of
>>>> political free speech.
>>>>
>>>>> It's always FAR easier for incumbents to raise money and support,
>>>>> especially by and from corporations than those trying to take their
>>>>> places.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thus your argument fails.
>>>>
>>>> Fails, really? Then explain why the Democrats lost so heavily in both
>>>> state legislative and Congressional elections in 2010. Incumbents were
>>>> slaughtered. mainly due to the new voter PACs getting their message
>>>> out to the public.
>>>>
>>>>> It was the BUSH administration that had the most to gain (at that
>>>>> time) by Citizens United; that most-likely being why the Justice Dept.
>>>>> THEN didn't appeal. Those in-power at the time didn't WANT an appeal.
>>>>
>>>> Wrong. Citizens was not decided until January 21, 2010. Bush left office
>>>> in
>>>> January 2009.
>>>>
>>>>> NOW, of course, with Democrats more in-power, the situation and ruling
>>>>> backfired on the Republicans.
>>>>
>>>> How do you reach that conclusion? Obama stayed in office through dirty
>>>> politics and the main stream media being an arm of the White House and
>>>> Democrat propaganda machine.
>>>>
>>>>> That tends to happen all the time with rules intended to help keep the
>>>>> current SOB's in and the opposing party out. When the out-party
>>>>> complains, the in-party just sneers ... until THEY are out, and said
>>>>> rules are used against them. THEN they complain, and point-out that
>>>>> the new in-party USED to complain, so why do they now support and USE
>>>>> those same rules?
>>>>>
>>>>> Turn-About it seems, is NOT considered "fair play" in politics.
>>>>
>>>> Yeah, you should hear all the Democrat whining and crying in NC since
>>>> the Republicans captured both the Governor's office and both houses of
>>>> the state legislature. The Dems gerrymandered voting districts to favor
>>>> Dems for decades, now when the Repubs do it, it's "dirty politics."
>>>>
>>>
>>> YUP. What so many forget is: The Democratic National Committee is
>>> incorporated. The Democrats hate "right wing" PACS but love left wing
>>> PACS. he Koch brothers are evil but George Soros is not.
>>
>> Exactly.
>> Obama lamanted the Citizens decision during his state of the union address
>> just
>> two days after it was released. He realized what the effect would be on
>> the
>> 2010 elections ahead of time. And it had a major effect, shifting the
>> balance of
>> power in state and national elections.
>> 2014 is probably going to be a repeat with the Repubs taking the senate.
>>
>
>It's beginning to look that way.
ROTFLMAO!
You not going to gain shit,in fact you're losing the
House.
You do know satisfaction with Republicans is down to 8%?
>The Republican congress critters from both
>houses are getting an earful from their constituents telling them to keep
>blocking Obana and to do anyting they can to stop "Obamacare".
Meanwhile..back in the real world.
'If We Try To Defund Obamacare, We Lose The House Of Representatives'
http://www.ijreview.com/2013/08/73877-watch-if-we-try-to-defund-obamacare-we-lose-the-house-of-representatives/
At an Americans for Prosperity meeting in his district, Rep. Adam
Obamacare in an upcoming vote, the party will lose control of the
House of Representatives to the Democrats next year.
the government shut down because soldiers are not getting paid and all
--
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kUKzDANF6QU
Those who were upset about the non-guilty verdict in this case thought that George Zimmerman should have never been able to walk free after killing an innocent teenager.
Although the jury claimed that there wasn't sufficient evidence to put the man behind bars, the re-enactment of Trayvon's death, with real 9-11 audio from the night of his death, seems to tell a very different story.
|
| Follow-ups: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 |
| 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 |
|