Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Neocon who wrote (133671)	3/27/2001 1:49:16 PM
From: Kevin Rose	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

Thanks. I'll look it over. So, the ACLU and Republicans are teaming up! Dogs and cats, living together! Who ya gonna call?

To: Neocon who wrote (133671)	3/27/2001 3:17:20 PM
From: Thomas A Watson	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769667

Well Neocon, from what the ACLU is saying about McCain-Feingold I can now understand why I heard all the democrats who were mouthing support for it are now say Oh-feces, now that they have read it. If we look to the democrat last most highest ranking officials we can get a clear sense of the demorat party true belief in Free Speech. We have the ex-vice now professor of journalism in a non disclosure teaching position and mr. bill, pardon this rich expression, the best that ever was..... Clinton Bans Unapproved Questions at First 'Public' Speech newsmax.com tom watson tosiwmee

To: Neocon who wrote (133671)	3/27/2001 7:34:49 PM
From: DMaA	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769667

Thank you for looking that up. Took you about, what? 2 minutes? Guess Kevin must get his news from Danny Blather. This thing is unconstitutional and McCain and Feingold know it. Anyone who has taken the oath to uphold and defend the Constitution, then pushes a bill that tramples it, has no honor. Truthfully, they should be expelled for the Senate for breaking their oath.

To: Neocon who wrote (133671)	3/27/2001 8:20:11 PM
From: Kevin Rose	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769667

Also, I'm not sure the following point is valid: "A two-month blackout on all television and radio ads before primary and general elections. The only individuals and groups that would be able to characterize a candidate’s record on radio or T.V. during this sixty-day period would be the candidates, PACs and the media. Thus, a group of concerned citizens could not place an ad during this period." What is stated in the bill appears to be: "The Snowe-Jeffords amendment permits 501(c)(4) non-profit corporations to make electioneering communications as long as they use only individual contributions (not corporate or union funds) and make certain disclosures. The amendment thus prevents unions or corporations from laundering funds through non-profits to make electioneering communications." Seems that a group of concerned citizens could, through individual and limited contributions, still place these ads inside the 30/60 day periods. Or am I ready this wrong? How does limited of money used in ad campaigns violate free speech? In the same way antitrust laws violate pursuit of happiness (by monopolies)? Or how term limits violate Willie Brown's ability to make an honest living (yes, that is a joke)?